Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 UDC 27 ISSN 1451-0928

ÅASOPIS
Teorijsko glasilo Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu

TEOLOÃKI

Broj 9

2

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

3

Teoloãki åasopis, broj 9, 2009. godine. Izdavaå: Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu. Adi Endrea 30, 21000 Novi Sad, Srbija. Tel: +381.(0)21.469-410 Elektronska poãta: nsts@sbb.co.rs Internet stranica: www.nsts-online.org Glavni i odgovorni urednik: prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan. Urednici: mr Nikola Kneæeviñ mr Srœan Sremac. Recenzenti: -prof. dr Heleen Zorgdrager, Ukrainian Catholic University, Ukrajina, Kerk in Actie, Holandija -prof. dr Anne-Marie Kool, Karoly Gaspar Reformed University, Budimpešta, Maðarska; -prof. dr Jasmin Miliñ, Protestantsko teoloãko uåiliãte Mihail Starin, Osijek, Hrvatska; -Kevin Steger, Ph.D. Dallas Baptist University, SAD; -Hank Kanters, D.Min. World Life Centre, Kanada; i -dr Svetislav Rajšiñ, Protestantski teološki fakultet, R. Srbija Prelom: Miloã Moravek Ãtampa: MBM-plas Tiraæ: 500 primeraka ISSN: 1451-0928 UDC: 27

Izdavanje ovog åasopisa finansiralo je Ministarstvo vera Republike Srbije u okviru projekta: "Unapreœivanje verske kulture, verskih sloboda i tolerancije".

4

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 IZ UVODNIKA PRVOGA BROJA TEOLOÃKOG ÅASOPISA

Teoloãki åasopis je godiãnjak Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, u kome se objavljuju radovi profesora i studenata, istorijski dokumenti kao i letopis rada fakulteta. Meœutim, osmiãljen je tako da uskoro moæe da preraste kategoriju godiãnjaka. Åeænja duãe mi je da vidim kako Teoloãki åasopis strategijom kvasca, nenametljivo i nezadræivo, postaje platforma teoloãkog promiãljanja ovde i sada: u naãem duhovnom i kulturnom kontekstu. Upravo ovaj i ovakav kontekst nameñe obavezu ozbiljnog pristupa i tretmana pravoslavne teoloãke misli i to u punini njene istorijske dimenzije. Kontekstualna teoloãka promiãljanja, koja ovaj åasopis priæeljkuje, opravdañe svoj pridev jedino ako budu odraæavala pluralizam hriãñanskih denominacija koji karakteriãe vojvoœansku i ãiru domañu stvarnost. Iz tog razloga, ljubazno pozivam kako pravoslavne tako i katoliåke i protestantsko/evanœeoske teologe i crkvene sluæitelje da svoja bogoslovska razmiãljanja izraze u Teoloãkom åasopisu. Pouåite nas i pouåimo se. Samo istinotraæitelji su istinski Bogotraæitelji. Prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu

. . . . . . . . . . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Komparativni pristup: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Savremena pastirska sluæba crkve . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 PREGLEDNI RADOVI Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . . 95 Csongor . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the front-line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: Pisani i slikani izvori . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 5 SADRÆAJ: Reå urednika . . . . . . 7 NAUÅNI RADOVI Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . . 203 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 STRUÅNI RADOVI Petar Piliñ Duhovni aspekti bolesti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Osnovne biblijske vere . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski Traganje za neizrecivim . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Foundations of Biblical Faith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N° 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS: Word Forward by the Editor-in-chief . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the Front-Line . . 95 Csongor . . . . . . 203 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Symbolism of the Feast of Pentakost: Written and Painted Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski The Quest for the Unspeakable . . . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Comparative Perspective: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . .6 Teoloãki åasopis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Contemporary Pastoral Ministry of the Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 PAPER IN APPLIED THEOLOGY Petar Piliñ Spiritual Aspects of Illness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 SCIENTIFIC PAPERS Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . . . . . . . . . 141 OVERVIEW PAPERS Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . . . . .

jer svojim svehriãñanskim stavom doprinosi boljem hermenautiåkom pristupu svetopisamskog otkrivenja i same crkvene predaje. veñ i socioloãki. inkorporirajuñi tako sve druãtveno . Verujem da ñe deveti broj Teoloãkog åasopisa pre svega pomoñi åitaocima u daljem razvoju teoloãkog iskustva i saznanja i joã jednom dati svoj doprinos kako celokupnom teoloãkom promiãljanju tako i nauci uopãte. Sagledavajuñi mesto i ulogu Teoloãkog åasopisa unutar verskog konteksta naãe zemlje moæe se slobodno reñi da je njegova uloga afirmativna. jer svojom verskom i etniåkom ãarolikoãñu na pravi naåin oslikava i naãe druãtveno okruæenje i samim tim pridonosi izgradnji tolerantnijeg druãtva uopãte. On ima ulogu da kultiviãe teoloãku misao uzimajuñi u obzir sve tri hriãñanske provenijencije.humanistiåke nauke u jednu koherentnu celinu.nauåni karakter.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 7 Reå urednika Kao i prethodni brojevi i ovaj broj se moæe pohvaliti sadræajem koji je interdisciplinarnog karaktera. Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ . razvijajuñi pritom konstruktivni dijalog izmeœu istih. ne samo u teoloãkom veñ i u duhovnom smislu. Na taj naåin dolazi do izraæaja i njegova ekumenska dimenzija. Upravo ovo ilustruje da Teoloãki åasopis nema samo teoloãko .

N° 9 NAUÅNI RADOVI .8 Teoloãki åasopis.

Andrej Tarkovski pripada generaciji posleratnih reæisera koji su stvarali nakon perioda dominacije epskog stila Sergeja Ajzenãtajna u kome je montaæa predstavqala .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 9 Irina Radosavqeviñ UDK 929:778.2010 fakulteta BUmaster teorije Prihvañeno: 15. emocionalne izraæajnosti likova i konstruisawa alegorijskih zagonetki iako mu je ovo posledwe åesto pripisivano. veñ je nastojao da tanano sugeriãe i naznaåi ostavqajuñi tako prostor gledaocu da sam naåini pokret ka neizrecivom.tragawe za neizrecivim Rezime Stvarajuñi svoje filmove. a ono ãto je nevidqivo i skriveno nije pokuãavao da opisuje i prepriåava. Primatan je jak uticaj pravoslavne ikonografije i estetskih sredstava koja ona upotrebqava. gledaocu pruæi priliku za jedno autentiåno duhovno iskustvo. poniruñi u tajnu postojawa sveta i åoveka.5Tarkovski Andrej diplomirani teolog Originalni nauåni rad Pravoslavnog bogoslovskog Primljeno: 11.03. åuveni reæiser Andrej Tarkovski nastojao je da.03. Wegov primarni ciq bio je da kamerom uhvati samu sræ æivota u svim wegovim dimenzijama.2010 umetnosti i medija Univerziteta umetnosti u Beogradu irinarados@hotmail.com Andrej Tarkovski . veñ veãtom upotrebom onih sredstava koji su svojstveni filmu kao mediju. Duhovna dimenzija wegovih filmova nije izgraœena religioznim narativom. Tarkovski je teæio oslobaœawu od logike linearnog narativa.

Metalnikov. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity. Tako. Velika je vrlina biti kadar za sluãawe i razumevawe. .. Stvaralaãtvo Tarkovskog je nailazilo na topao i dubok prijem kod odreœenog dela publike i taj odgovor publike ga je hrabrio da istraje uprkos svim teãkoñama. prvi princip qudskih odnosa: spremnost da se qudi razumeju i da im se oproste nenamerne greãke..com 2 Idem. u kome autor. ali uvek duboke misli. ozbiqan dijalog samnom kao gledaocem. a za ispovest je zaista potrebna hrabrost. samo monolog. uæivajuñi reputaciju mraånog i opskurnog umetnika.. Ali. åiji su filmovi nerazumqivi i nejasni. razgovara sam sa sobom“. wihovi prirodni neuspesi.. ne mareñi za sagovornika.Meœutim. je o filmu Ogledalo. sa dubokim æaqewem moram reñi da je wegov film namewen uskom krugu gledalaca koji su dobro upoznati sa kinematografijom“. N° 9 osnovno izraæajno sredstvo. M. pisao: „Od velikog umetnika oåekujem. Tarkovski je ukazivao i na wene nedostatke pokuãavajuñi da pronaœe prisniji i liåniji naåin izraæavawa u filmskoj umetnosti.10 Teoloãki åasopis. Kuåev. film o kome ne mogu govoriti. Radnik u lewingradskoj fabrici pisao je: „Razlog zaãto Vam piãem je Ogledalo. nakon svega. Iskusio je neprekidnu borbu sa cenzurom i negativnom kritikom unutar SSSR-a. 1 A B.2 Realnost je ipak bila malo drugaåija. u kwizi Vajawe u vremenu on navodi delove pisama koje su mu slali poãtovaoci wegovog rada. takoœe kritiåar sovjetskog perioda. Ako su dvoje qudi sposbni da makar jednom 1 David Wishard. http://www.To je. originalne. M. sovjetski kritiåar. u ovom filmu dijaloga nema. Uvaæavajuñi veliåinu ove filmske ãkole.nostalghia. piãe: „Film Andreja Tarkovskog je filmska ispovest. zato ãto ga æivim.

Tarkovski je za mene najveñi. wegovom odnosu prema drugom åoveku. U svim nejasnostima i neodreœenostima Xejmson ne vidi zadivqujuñu 3 Andrej Tarkovski. koji uspeva da uhvati æivot kao refleksiju. Åak i ako je jedan æiveo u eri mamuta. Bergman je za wega govorio: „Moje otkrivawe prvog filma Andreja Tarkovskog bilo je ravno åudu. bilo je i drugaåijih miãqewa poput onog Fredrika Xejmsona. Tokom vremena stekli su veliki broj poãtovalaca. on se kretao slobodno i sa lakoñom. Odjednom. netrpeqiv prema bilo kakvoj alegoriji.com . o åeæwi za apsolutnim. nisam nikada imao. na primer. komentatora. 5 Robert. smatra da je glavni junak u svojoj dosadnoj stradalnoj usamqenosti kojom podseña na Hrista mnogo mawe privlaåan nego socijalno neprilagoœena varalica kako je prikazan u izvornom tekstu. naãao sam se pred vratima sobe åije kquåeve. Tragaju za istinom o æivotu. æivot kao san.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 11 iskuse isto. posmatra kao „otuænu religioznu priåu“ i. jezik koji odgovara prirodi filma.“3 Filmovi Tarkovskog govore o åoveku. http://www. prema sopstvenim neistraæenim dubinama.“4 Ipak. a drugi u doba elektriciteta. 1989. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). onaj koji je stvorio novi jezik. do tada. Wegova kritika5 obojena je podrugqivim odnosom prema rediteqevom „velikom misticizmu“. Prometej. moñi ñe da razumeju jedno drugo. Osetio sam ohrabrewe i podsticaj: neko je izraæavao ono ãto sam ja oduvek æeleo da iskaæem a nisam znao kako. Bird. a sam Tarkovski status jednog od najznaåajnijih autora svih vremena. svetu. Stalkera. Novi Sad.nostalghia.). 1999. Vajawe u vremenu. Po sobi u koju sam oduvek æeleo da uœem. 8. Umentiåka druæina ANonim. tumaåa. 4 Marina Tarkovska (prireœ. Beograd. o wegovom smislu. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics.

alegorijama i drugim stilskim figurama u kojima Tarkovski vidi opasnost od udaqavawa filma od sebe samog. Ne prigovara toliko „religioznom sadræaju“ koliko „umetniåkoj pretencioznosti“. Tako shvañen simbol . Ova kritika odaje izvesnu nemoguñnost wenog autora da prodre dubqe u umetniåki diskurs Tarkovskog i da osmotri wegovo delo kao celinu. Sam Tarkovski je bio protivnik alegorije u filmu. Ipak ñe biti da u filmovima A. Xejmson odbacuje Tarkovskog kao umetnika (wegovo delo vidi kao neuspeli pokret jednog moraliste ka umetniåkom diskursu) zarad Tarkovskog kao alegoriste (mada je sam Tarkovski iskazivao nepoverewe prema alegoriji) koji je uvuåen u ideoloãki konflikt i to. pretenziji na umetnost. na æalost. Ne uspevajuñi da sagleda celinu wegovog dela. simbol je beskonaåno koje se izraæava u konaånom. Xejmson je smatrao da Tarkovski pokuãava da religiozni sadræaj svojih dela opravda. Ipak. navodno visokom umetnoãñu i duboko æali nad „trenutnim sovjetskim religioznim trendom“ koji vidi kao straãnu zarazu. Za wega je usporenost kretawa kamere i glumaca „nepodnoãqiva za sve osim za najvernije poklonike Tarkovskog“. zadivqen je pred wegovom sposobnoãñu da uhvati „istinu u mahovini“ i „momente u kojima elementi govore“. Tarkovskog ne nalazimo jasno i nedvosmisleno iskazan ideoloãki diskurs i da se o takvom diskursu moæe govoriti samo ako se prethodno upoznati autorovi stavovi uåitaju u wegove filmove.12 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 estetiku Tarkovskog veñ samo alegoriju i ideologiju. potcewujuñi estetiku i strukturu wegovih filmova. odnosno. Za razliku od alegorije koja predstavqa formu u kojoj konaåno teæi da se u beskonaånom poniãti i ukine. na pogreãnoj strani. a ne samo kao religioznu alegoriju ili izraz odreœene ideologije. Po wemu. On odbacuje postojawe umetniåke autonomije Tarkovskog i wegov opus shvata samo kao izraz wegovih teorijskih postavki. On daje æivot metaforama. „poetski film“ se svojim slikama udaqava od åiweniånog i konkretnog u oslikavawu stvarnosti afirmisawem sopstvenog ustrojstva i celovitosti.

i suoåeni sa tajnim znaåewem u wihovom totalitetu. On je oblikovan prirodnim procesom. veñ disati onim åime oni diãu... ali kao sredstva za iskazivawe neiskazivog pri åemu ono ãto je upotrebqavao kao simbol nikada nije gubilo svoje bukvalno znaåewe da bi mesto ustupilo nekom drugaåijem. Ipak.Simboli ne mogu biti drugaåije izraæeni niti objaãweni. kada u svojoj arkani obelodawuje jezik nagoveãtaja i zbliæavawa s neåim ãto ne moæe biti objaãweno. i u svojoj najveñoj dubini ostaje nedokuåiv. koristio je simbole. 6 Andrej Tarkovski. govorio je.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 13 bi se mogao povezati sa teæwom Tarkovskog da kroz prikazivawe neposredne stvarnosti iskaæe i ono beskonaåno. poput kristala.. parabola i poreœewa. „Umetnost åini beskonaånost dodirqivom“. cit. on je monada i zato po ustrojewu razliåit od kompleksnih i razloæivih alegorija. neposredno i emocionalno. On ima mnogo lica i misli. mi smo bespomoñni“. ãto je nesaopãtivo reåima.. .. da ga posmatra kao ãto se posmatraju zvezde ili more.. Smatrao je da svaki gledalac treba sam da doæivi film. Ono ãto je Tarkovski æeleo da izbegne jeste nametnuto intelektualno tumaåewe svojih dela i optereñenost gledalaca tim tumaåewem. boqem i uzviãenijem znaåewu koje tek treba odgonetnuti veñ je neposredno delovalo na gledaoca gradeñi celinu i wen smisao. U „Vajawu u vremenu“ on navodi Vjaåeslava Ivanova i wegov komentar o celovitosti umetniåkog dela koje naziva simbolom i taj navod najboqe govori o wegovom viœewu upotrebe simbola: „Simbol je istinit samo onda kada je neiscrpan i neograniåen u svojim znaåewima. op. Nije neophodno otkriti znaåewe simbola.6 Tarkovski je smatrao da film kao celina treba da predstavqa simbol i nosi znaåewe. Uistinu. dok unutar filma simboli lako postaju kliãei koji ga liãavaju realnosti i æivotnosti. 46.

Reaktion Books. tako. Kod wega je sve izbrisano skoro do taåke neizraæajnosti. Tarkovski je æeleo da kamerom uhvati sræ æivota i stvarnosti. Sami glumci sa kojima je radio svedoåe da je wegovo reæirawe uglavnom bilo ograniåeno na pozicirawe u prostoru i pokret. to jednostavno znaåi da ne radi i niãta osim toga. N° 9 Poqski reæiser Kãiãtof Kiãlovski je jednom prilikom rekao da ukoliko je na filmu prikazan upaqaå koji ne radi. 73. ali da su retki trenutci u kojima reæiser uspe da postigne joã neko znaåewe. 2008. Ibid.“8 Tarkovski je. ravni åudu. poput Bresona odbacivao psihologizaciju likova. namernim ili nasilnim u odnosu na jedinstvo. a to je Andrej Tarkovski“. . London. 71. Smatrao je da je apsurdno traæiti objektivnu istinu te da postoje samo liåne istine. ali je bio svestan da je to u apsolutnom smislu nemoguñe i da je film ipak iluzija. tvorca sveta koji gotovo postaje stvarnost jer u wemu nema niåeg ãto bi se pokazalo veãtaåkim. odnosno. emocionalnoj izra7 8 Robert Bird. Svojim studentima je govorio : „Nije moguñe fotografisati stvarnost.14 Teoloãki åasopis. Breson je bio wegov veliki uåiteq: „U svojim filmovima Breson se pretvara u demijurga. „U posledwih nekoliko godina samo je jedan reæiser uspeo da ostvari åudo. ikonom koja se odupirala linearnoj perspektivi. moæete jedino stvoriti wenu sliku“. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. dok je uporno izbegavao da sa wima razgovara o onome ãto bi trebalo da misle ili oseñaju. To je izraæajnost koja je dovedena do takve preciznosti i lakonizma da prestaje da bude izraæajna.7 Sliku koja je plod liånog doæivqaja i opaæawa stvarnosti i wenih razliåitih dimenzija. Nalazimo joã jednu potvrdu sliånosti wegovog stila sa sredwevekovnim sakralnim slikarstvom.

slike i narativa. sneg u crkvi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 15 æajnosti likova i alegorijskim zagonetkama. ali se na wemu ne zaustavqa. glumac bi trebalo da prikaæe obiånog. San. U wegovim slikama meãaju se naturalistiåko i numunozno. Trebalo bi da bude autentiåno jedinstven. Realistiåne scene æivota sredwevekovne Rusije su u Rubqovu izmeãane sa scenama izmeœu sna i jave. Vrhunac izraæajnosti jeste da bude na svom odgovarajuñem mestu. u Andreju Rubqovu. snova i maãte. pogled ka unutra. realnog åoveka. unutraãwa realnost. Po Tarkovskom. sve izgledalo drugaåije. . javqawe mrtvog Teofana. señawe. na primer. Tarkovski insistira na realizmu. ponovo. likovi Tarkovskog mogu izgledati bezizraæajno dok se ne sagleda bogatstvo razliåitih pogleda uperenih na wih sa svih moguñih strana. a ne glumi. kao ãto su let balonom. Marija i deca u sceni señawa u Nostalgiji ãto je postignuto jednostavnim pretråavawem glumaca sa jednog na drugo mesto kad izaœu iz kadra. Wega interesuje i druga. Reãavawe odnosa izmeœu ikone i filma. ka subjektivnoj percepciji dogaœaja je ono ãto proæima sve wegove filmove. Zanimqivo da se kod wega javqa i prisutnost istih likova na dva razliåita mesta u jednom istom neprekinutom kadru (ãto je. Jedinstven. ali je na kraju. jedna od karakteristika ikone. Donatas Banionis je govorio da se åesto oseñao kako prosto pozira. åak je za film Andrej Rubqov bio kritikovan zbog naturalizma pojedinih scena. svojstveno ikoni). Tarkovski je postavio temeqe i za tehnike upotrebqene u narednim filmovima. duhovna dimenzija. ali ne izraæajan. svet onakav kakav je kad proœe kroz prizmu qudskog liånog doæivqaja. ãto je. Ogoqeni realizam dostupan qudskom oku za wega nije kraj priåe o onome ãto æeli da zabeleæi. takoœe. Kao i figure na ikoni. subjektivni svet misli i oseñawa. utisaka i raspoloæewa. da gledalac ne primeti da on zapravo glumi. Ili scene Ivanovih snova ili señawa nasuprot realistiånim slikama rata u Ivanovom detiwstvu. wegova nevidqiva. ruska Golgota.

Boju je.16 Teoloãki åasopis. najboqi primer nelinearnog narativa predstavqa film Ogledalo u kome je potpuno napuãten vremenski kontinuitet. odnosno varijacije u ritmu samog filma. autor jednog eseja 9 Robert Bird. a dogaœaji iz tri razliåita vremenska perioda prikazana izmeãano. http://www. takoœe se mogu razumeti kao jedno poetsko sredstvo buduñi da podseñaju na poeziju. takoœe. haiku poezija. a konfuzna i haotiåna simfonija wenog mrmqawa neprimetno prelazi u istinsku muziku. koristio kao jako izraæajno sredstvo da prenese odreœeno raspoloæewe ili emociju. åak monohtromnu. Auditivni pejzaæ filma kao da postoji paralelno sa vizuelnim i kao da dolazi sa nekog drugog mesta. Andrea Trpin. Smewivawe dugaåkog kadra i brze montaæe. ãto je vidno u Stalkeru.com . Ipak. na primer. jambiåki pentametar. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. veñ slagawe slika u procesu asocijacija kao ãto to åine pesnici. Tarkovski se seña da je dvadeset puta restruktuirao film pre nego ãto ga je zavrãio. dok je Rubqov sniman u crno-beloj tehnici. N° 9 I u teoriji i u praksi Tarkovski je nastojao da se oslobodi logike linearnog narativa i pribliæi logici poezije. stvarawe slike raspoloæewa i atmosfere kako je to åinila. Tarkovski upotrebqava i isprekidan i nepodudaran zvuk stvarajuñi tako auru „ontoloãke neodreœenosti“: “Åini se kao da sama Priroda poåiwe åudesno da govori. Ivanovo detiwstvo je bio pravi skok u evoluciji ruskog filma svojom narativnom strukturom zasnovanoj na asocijativnim vezama i tananim prelazima izmeœu sna i jave. wemu veoma draga. Pod pojmom poetskog u filmu nije podrazumevao teæwu ka lirizmu i romantici. Uglavnom koristi ograniåenu paletu boja.nostalghia.“9 Zvukovi kod Tarkovskog se neobjaãwivo pojavquju i nestaju åesto varajuñi uho i u pogledu svog izvora.

a wihovu postojanost remeti wihovo åesto neoåekivano pojavqivawe. Time Tarkovski otvara prostor gledaocu da zaviri u numinoznu stvarnost ili bar.10 Takav zvuk destabilizuje. Snimajuñi Nostalgiju nije æeleo da je prikaæe turistiåki kroz najlepãa mesta i predele. koja se nikad do kraja ne razreãava.. . Kada je reå o prostoru Andreja Tarkovskog11. Crkvu odlikuju åvrsti uspravni stubovi i neæni lukovi. Prirodu predstavqa jednostavan tok koji upija qudski pogled. 51-69. on je uvek liåan jer ga oblikuje qudski pogled.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 17 na temu zvuka u filmovima Andreja Tarkovskog.je najåeãñe prikazana kao plodna i æiva. modernih hotela i ogoqenih hotelskih soba. bare. kuña ili dom i crkva ili svetiliãte. trava. ukazuje da wegova „upotreba dvosmislenog zvuka uvlaåi publiku u borbu. da li da veruju u priåu. kao ãto se filmski likovi bore sa sopstvenom sposobnoãñu da imaju veru“. 2008. voda (kiãa. a ponekad se åini i da ga uzvraña.) . sneg. Reaktion Books. moæe biti da se radi i o pravoslavnom etosu qubavi prema tvorevini kao daru Boæijem koji trpi posledice åovekovog pada i åeka da bude obnovqena u svoj svojoj lepoti u 10 11 Idem. postavi pitawe ontoloãke sigurnosti. a stranci unutra. Svako od tih prostora se razlikuje po osobenom vizuelnom naponu koji nastaje ukrãtawem pogleda kamere sa pogledima likova i gledalaca. veñ da da prikaz Italije kroz poglede svojih likova ãto je ukquåivalo i slike nepoznatih ruãevina. Ipak.. Priroda – drveñe. Nikada nije samo dekorativan ili informativan. åini da ono ãto je sasvim ugodno i celovito odjednom izgleda strano i zbuwujuñe. na ivici panteizma. potoci. London. Kuña poseduje prozore kroz koje stanari gledaju napoqe. U wegovim filmovima dominiraju priroda. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. Robert Bird.

22. simbolom novog æivota. crkva belih zidova koja åeka da bude oslikana. ona kao da vidi. Kuñu. razume. N° 9 punoñi („Jer æarkim iãåekivawem tvorevimna oåekuje da se jave sinovi Boæiji“ da bi se „oslobodila od robovawa propadqivosti“)12 Wegova priroda je gotovo slovesna. nakon Katasonikove smrti. 21. Kolin u crkvi pali cigaretu izmeœu ostataka freske Bogorodice i razbuktalog plamena. plamen. oltar sa hlebom. U Solarisu i Ærtvi ona je i mesto nerazreãenih porodiånih tenzija. a svetiliãte s åuvenom Madonom del Parte na wenom poåetku. Kolin razbija tu atmosferu besnim zvowewem zvona. priroda je zagaœena i nepredvidiva. Kasnije. prosuto mleko. Andrej Rubqov obiluje predstavama crkvi. tatarsko razvaqivawe ulaza u crkvu i ulazak u wu na 12 13 Poslanica Rimqanima 8. U Ivanovom detiwstvu. åipka. Katedrala u nadrealnom pejzaæu koji podseña na De Kirikove slike pojavquje se na kraju Nostalgije. kwige. Tarkovski. Åesti motivi u kuñi su åaãe.18 Teoloãki åasopis. Na samom poåetku seqak Jefim i wegov skok sa vrha crkve. 8. dok je u Nostalgiji i Ærtvi pomalo zapostavqena da bi se Ærtva zavrãila scenom olistavawa suvog drveta kao simbolom ispuwene nade i procvetale vere. Rim. gotovo uvek prikazuje kao dañu na selu. bunker u jednom trenutku podseti na crkvu tokom liturgije. U Ogledalu i Nostalgiji ona se javqa samo u snovima punim åeæwe za povratkom u dom. a zanimqivo je da unutraãwost kuñe åesto ostaje neodrediva kao da prostorije mewaju svoj poloæaj. sastradava i raduje se zajedno sa åovekom („Jer znamo da sva tvar zajedno uzdiãe i tuguje do sada“)13. U Ivanovom detiwstvu Ivan ulazi na vrata u kuñu koja je skoro potpuno uniãtena kao ãto åini i Domeniko u Nostalgiji. U Stalkeru. . a Ærtva kuñom koja nestaje u vatri. zvono. Nostalgija zavrãava kuñom u nestvarnom pejzaæu unutar katedrale. dolazi do izvesne promene. krstovi.

padova i pokajawa. iznad svega. iscequje. zaãto åovek æivi i koji je smisao wegovog postojawa. „Umetnost je sredstvo pripajawa sveta åoveku. tako da najmawe ãto åovek moæe da uradi tokom svog æivota. onaj koji vodi duhovnom 14 Andrej Tarkovski. Wegovi junaci su najåeãñe oni koji tragaju. iskupqewa i ærtve. za izmirewem. Jer. åeznu za Biñem. Tarkovski piãe: „Mene privlaåi åovek koji je spreman da sluæi viãem ciqu. i crkva kao mesto epifanije – Teofanovo javqawe sa onoga sveta. op. ukquåen u putawu åovekovog kretawa prema onom ãto nazivamo apsolutnom istinom“. putuju u nepoznate svetove svog unutraãweg biña. cit. za istinskim postojawem. åovek koji prepoznaje da smisao qudskog postojawa leæi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 19 kowima. u borbi protiv zla u nama samima. po wemu imao posebnu misiju i posebnu odgovornost. kako sebi tako i onima oko sebe. ona ipak. otuœenosti i zajedniãtva. instrument wegovog saznavawa. a ono bar da se upita i da drugima postavi pitawe. a sam umetnik je. jeste da napravi bar jedan korak ka duhovnom savrãenstvu. Liãena duhovnosti umetnost odgaja u sebi svoju vlastitu tragediju. . raœa i utvrœuje tamo gde postoji nezasita åeæwa za duhovnim kao idealom. po wemu. koji ne æeli – ili åak ne moæe – da pristane na opãte prihvañenu svetsku ‘moralnost’. Zato je i video izvesnu religioznu dimenziju same umetnosti. na æalost.14 Umetnost se. jedini drugi put je. Za Tarkovskog. Tarkovski je smatrao da postoji analogija izmeœu potresa izazvanog umetniåkim delom i onog koje potiåe iz åisto religioznog iskustva. ciq celokupne umetnosti je da objasni. Ako ne da objasni. Umetnik mora da teæi istini i ma koliko ta istina bila straãna. stradawa i zla. Ciq umetnosti je da kroz potres i katarzu uåini qudsku duãu prijemåivom za dobro i da joj priliku za jedno autentiåno duãevno iskustvo. Muåe ih pitawa vere i smisla.

nagon govori wegovom telu koji pokret ñe ga spasiti. 237 . uzvodi do samih vrata te tajne ostavqajuñi ih da poput Stalkera. govorio je. one koji na taj poziv odgovore. Ono ãto sawa i ono åemu se nada.“15 Wegovi likovi su zaokupqeni sopstvenim duhovnim krizama..16 Kao dubok i odgovoran umetnik. a naãe svakodnevno iskustvo i sveopãti pritisak da se povinujemo åini izbor ovog drugog puta isuviãe lakim.. Za wega su svet i åovek neizrecive tajne i on svoje gledaoce. molitvu. cit.. transcendentno.20 Teoloãki åasopis. op. 15 16 Andrej Tarkovski. uzvodi ka jednom neizrecivom i mistiånom iskustvu. Kada je neko ko ne zna da pliva baåen u vodu. unutraãwim tragawima. veru qubav. sami u wu zarone i suoåe se sa sobom i sa onostranim. Andrej Tarkovski. po naãem miãqewu. „nadu. boæansko.. rvawem sa æivotom i wegovim smislom te su tako wegovi filmovi i svojim narativom upleteni u reãavawe neizreciva tajne postojawa ulazeñi tako u prostor duhovnog i religioznog. ãto ga.. veñ samo nenametqivo poziva na susret i opãtewe i.. Stil Andreja Tarkovskog religiozni diskurs ne objavquje i ne natura. Andrej Tarkovski je na ekran umeãno prenosio duboko proæivqenu istinu åovekovog postojawa u ovom svetu dotiåuñi se i wegove duhovne dimenzije. åini autorom koji istanåano i s merom gradi duhovnu dimenziju filma. istanåanim oseñajem za upotrebu formalnih elemenata filma i narativa. cit. 206. åesto uprkos greãnosti samog pesnika“. „Umetnost potvrœuje ono najboqe u åoveku“. N° 9 propadawu. op. Umetnik je takoœe upravqen nekom vrstom nagona i wegovo delo produæava tragawe åoveka za onim ãto je veåno.

Robert. Umetniåka druæina Anonim.com Tarkovski. Reaktion Books. Vajawe u vremenu.nostalghia.nostalghia. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. http://www. Marina. 2008. Andrej. Prometej. Beograd. Novi Sad. Bird. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. 1989. Wishard. Tarkovska. Robert. 1999.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 21 Citirana dela: Bird. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). (prireœ.com .). http://www. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity. London. David.

but through subtle suggestions and hints in order to give an opportunity to his audience to make an effort to catch a glimpse of the invisible realities by themselves.22 Teoloãki åasopis. The spiritual dimension of his films is not established on religious narrative. N° 9 Resume Andrei Tarkovsky was a director who created his films with desire to penetrate deeply into the secret of human existence and give his audience the opportunity for an authentic spiritual experience. presenting the invisible without useless describing and retelling. emotional expressiveness of characters and allegorical constructions (though he was often criticized as too allegorical) showing strong influence of orthodox iconography and its esthetic means. but on skillful use of basic elements of film. Tarkovsky tended to free his films from the logic of linear narratives. His main effort was to catch the essence of life in all its dimensions. .

pojmova i savremenih interpretacija. bogoslovqa kao i samih hriãñana za uvek – novog i neponovqivog Gospoda Isusa Hrista. zatvorenost za „drugaåijost“. i daje jedan ãiroki moguñi naåin da se oni prevaziœu ili makar poånu da se prevazilaze i to pomoñu koncepta „dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. Liturgije.2010 Lazar Neãiñ. .96:252 Primljeno 19.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 23 UDK 281.com) Savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve Rezime Priloæeni tekst predstavqa pokuãaj analize savremenog stawa „pastirske sluæbe pravoslavne Crkve“ i to pre svega iz pravoslavno – bogoslovskog i kritiåkog ugla. Univerzitet u Beogradu) (nesic. za eshatoloãku Evharistiju. itd. a samim tim i preutemeqenu pastirsku sluæbu Crkve.lazar@gmail.01. (Pravoslavni bogoslovski fakultet.2010 Prihvañeno: 23. Tekst dijagnosticira taåke u kojima se takve anomalije pojavquju: nerelevantno bogoslovqe. Kroz krizu savremenog pravoslavnog bogoslovqa u Srbiji i ãire. wegovih uåewa. tj.02. relevantno i aktuelno bogoslovqe Crkve. romantiåno – epski jezik Pravoslavqa. zacementirana Liturgija. do krize razdvojenosti i ãizofrenije izmeœu Liturgije. otvorenosti Crkve. bogoslovqa i crkvene poboænosti.

jedno integralno obuhvatawe svih åovekovih razmiãqawa. N° 9 1. uvek – iznova – okuãano.. Bogoslovqe. neãto mnogo „drugaåije“ od svega ãto smo dosada åuli o wemu?! Bogoslovqe svagda jeste opis. „ortodoksnost“ naãe hriãñanske pravovernosti pred „bezboænim svetom“. Bogoslovqe se zbiva. niti „definicija Boga“. dakle.Bogoslovqe i pastirska sluæba Crkve u XXI veku Sredstva pojmovnog miãqewa su suviãe siromaãna da bi izrazila veånu beskonaånost Emil Sioran Ãta je bogoslovqe? Ãta bi moglo da bude bogoslovqe? Da li je to skup sistema. deãava. „ispravnost“ naãih stavova. opitno. niti iãta ãto potseña na neãto dato i zavrãeno. åoveka. . otkrivawe neotkrivenog. Bogoslovqe je. suæivota. Zacementirano. i qubav – Boæiju stalno – primajuñe. Bogoslovqe je upitanost. sveta. Da li je bogoslovqe tu da „osigura“ naãu poboænost. iskaza. definicija. doæivqaja. uvek – neponovqivo sazreva. pre svega.24 Teoloãki åasopis. qubavi izmeœu Svete Trojice i åoveka. riziåno – bezdano. æivota. dogaœa. veåno – biñevno – otkrivajuñe. „opravdawe“ za crkvenu samoizolaciju? Ili je bogoslovqe neãto „drugo“. Bogoslovqe je nikad – do – kraja – ispriåana priåa o onima koji se qube. veåito epikleptiåko . nije samo klasiåan „govor i nauk o Boæanstvu“. prizivajuñe.. pokuãaj neopisivog opisa susreta. izreka i poslovica o Bogu pothrawenih u muzejskoj zbirci Crkve koje åuåe u fasciklama na policama kabineta i åekaju da budu izvaœene u trenucima kada „ i Crkva treba da kaæe svoje“?! Ili je bogoslovqe neãto drugo. moguñnost nemoguñeg. neki susret moæda? Jedno neponovqivo otkrivawe „drugosti“ Boga.

Razlikom liånog qubavnog susreta! Razlikom onog Jevanœelskog: „Doœi i vidi“1. ni u bogoslovqu ni u æivotu. samo bogoslovqe se baca u bezdan moguñnosti. moguñnost gledawa „drugih“. Bogoslovqe „nema gde glavu prikloniti“. jer se ono bavi Onim koji krãi zakone. mewa obiåaje. 3 Temeqno istraæivawe ranih hriãñanskih molitvi. Ali. sa jednom velikom razlikom.. „U Pismu su svi odgovori“.. „tradicije“. zapisa. naæalost. jer se ono time ni ne bavi. rizikujuñi sve do samog svog biña. tekstova. . i to posebno kada znamo da danas i nije baã sve tako jednostavno i lako.2 Pogreãno je uverewe o bogoslovqu kao åuvaru „Boæijih zakona“. pruæiñe nam moæda iznenaœujuñi uvid u ovu åiwenicu prevashodnosti Dolaska Carstva nad osiguravawem druãtveno-politiåkog æivota. „Sveti Oci su odgovorili na sva pitawa“. åekaju da vide ishod borbe bogoslovqa i Onoga koga bogoslovqe treba. Bogoslovqe je ono evharistijski – epikleptiåko i qubavno – åeæwivo nadajuñe – se – iãåekivawe i neumoqivi vapaj: „Doœi Gospode“!3 Bogoslovqe je uznemiravawe onog nekrofilskog. „pravoslavnih vrednosti i obiåaja“. Jedinom „misijom“ koju Crkva moæe danas pruæiti. u samosigurnosti. „porodice“. bezdan neotkriveni. ali i moguñnost tragiånog neodnosa sa „drugima“. „druãtvenih i veånih vrednosti“. Bogoslovqe je rizik.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 25 Bogoslovqe nije odgovor na „dilemu Boga“! Bogoslovqe je i samo u dugaåkom redu nauka koje „muåi Bog“. itd. tradicije. konvencionalnog i nominalnog „hriãñanstva“ samodovoqnog od svojih „dostignuña“. uvodi 1 Jn 1. patriotizma. Jedinom moguñnoãñu koja nam je joã ostala u savremenom svetu. Bogoslovqe nema sve odgovore na sva pitawa. Dok ostale nauke sa distance. itd. 46 2 Treba iznova promisliti stare fraze prema kojima: „Vera ima odgovore na sva pitawa“. ãto je danas zakon postojawa.

saborskih. dogaœajno – novo. trendi. veåno – novo. Ono se ne moæe sastojati samo iz „utemequjuñih tekstova“ (svetopisamskih. fensi. ãto åekamo. Ãta zapravo znaåi „novi æivot“. novost. Bogoslovqe je zato i tragiåno. davao milostiwu – toliko ñe mi se vratiti u svetu gde pobeœuje idealna bezpristrasna pravda). molio se. Novina. Mora takoœe biti jasno kako produæiti ono ãto su „utemequjuñi“ tekstovi 4 Mt 5. itd. mrtvu floskulu. Koji gazi po smeñu logike ovog sveta4. 21 – 44. Koliko puta samo koristimo kovanicu „novi æivot“ kao obiånu. istorijskih. to tek iznova treba promisliti i proæiveti. Bogoslovska misao zahteva otvoreni horizont tema. svagda – novo. bogosluæbenih. otaåkih.26 Teoloãki åasopis. a ne kao „svagda – neponovqivo – novo“.. Novo je ono ãto dolazi. neoåekivano – novo. 1 – 14 5 Ali opet. nego kao od-smrti-izbavqenog i ne-viãe-u-smrti-okonåavajuñeg. kao „jednom – davno – novo“. jer ubija svako naãe sebence. N° 9 haos u harmoniju. problema i moguñih razjaãwewa. u Crkvi5. sigurnosti i statistike (tipa: koliko sam postio.. ne novog kao modno-zanimqivog. u to „rvawe sa Bogom“. dakle novo kao iãåekujuñe – nadawe i stalno – prizivajuñe – primawe Onog Novog. dolazeñe – novo. tj. tj.ali to je tek poåetak.). jer ne pruæa farisejsku sladuwavost morala. za åim åeznemo. a sve u prostoru „novog æivota“. kul. Jn 1. neponovqivo – novo. ono ãto prizivamo. ono ãto iskamo. kao jedan preævakani i nerealni termin u koji i sami malo verujemo. Bogoslovqe je uvek novo! Ali. . novo je samo ono istinsko uvek – novo. Pastirska sluæba Crkve predstavqa tek jedan „uvod“ kojim se åovek uspravqa i upuãta u taj rizik odnosa. koliko åesto smo svedoci da dotiånu reå „novo“ shvatamo samo u hronoloãko – istorijskom kontekstu. leåi. åemu se nadamo. Jedinog Novog. tj. Ona osposobqava. itd. itd. Hrista.. in.

na polici sebequbqa kao kakav lek protiv neistomiãqenika. starih hriãñanskih tekstualnih svedoåanstva. Evharistijom. u ãta se zapravo danas åesto pretvara kao u jedno „areheologisawe“ po tekstualnim iskopinama slavne. praviti.. idr. s druge strane? Da li takvo bogoslovqe polako eutanizira savremeno hriãñanstvo?) Bogoslovqe je hermeneutika susreta izmeœu Svete Trojice i Åoveka. æivim susretom. ustvari postaje pravi otrov za telo i polako ga usmrñuje. a pritom nemati potrebu za prizivajuñim – oæivaqavawem istih. otaåke proãlosti. „obiåajima i starim praksama“. Ono nas liãava uspavanosti. ne prima. tekstova. tj.. Ono nas liãava samodopadne sigurnosti. buduñi uvek nepotpuno – prisutno i iznova – oprisutnujuñe. Mestu koje je Tamo. Zato ona treba da bude osloboœena svakog kopirawa u korist interpretacije. ne funkcioniãe. Poloæiti svoju nadu jedino u ispravnost istorijskih tekstova na kojima poåiva danaãwe hriãñanstvo. itd. ma koliko dobra i koristna bila. ono nas na jedan divan i smireni naåin liãava moguñnosti da ga dræimo u nekim naãim „riznicama bogoslovqa“. iskustvom. Samo iz tog Tamo – eshatoloãkog mi ga moæemo prizvati. udomqeno na Drugom Mestu. æivotnost. Da li se analogno isto to deãava i onom bogoslovqu koje nema snage da svari „teæinu i ozbiqnost“. Mestu koje je nadnacionalno i nadteritorijalno. kovawem novih reåi.. s jedne strane i tragiku savremenog æivota. Mestu koje je Carstvo Boæije. itd. ujeziåavati. Imajmo u vidu da ni sami sveti oci nisu odgovorili na sva pitawa!!! . Pisma. askezom. Bivajuñi uvek Tamo. muåeniãtvom. Bogoslovqe je uvek Tamo. ali daleke. (Poznato je da hrana. Bogoslovqe nije samo „tumaåewe“ Svetih Otaca. i to one liåno – hermeneutiåke. ali koja se dobro „ne vari“. buduñi da se u – nesigurnosti 6 Npr. viãe je nego opasno. Mestu koje se neprestano – gradi i Koje iznova ikoniãe i ono ãto zovemo Crkva. „predawima“. hermeneutika uniãtewa smrti. u naãem sebiånom xepu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 27 uåinili6.

najistinitijeg sjediwewa sa Wim. onaj Dogaœaj Dolaska Drugog koji jedini moæe da ga donese Ovde.28 Teoloãki åasopis. u koje åesto upadamo8. u Crkvu i za Crkvu i Crkvi. najæivotnijeg. nepokajawem. borbu-oni sve vreme ugroæavaju statiånost ‘naåina æivota’ (citat preuzet iz: Naã æivot u Hristu. „jeretiåno“ åak. Mesto izbavqewa prostora i vremena od veånog neprisustva biña. osluãkivawa. Priåeãña. ono Drugo. dijaloga. To je Mesto razgovora. æivotom qubavi i ærtve. to je parodija istine. mesto koje poraœa novo biñe æivota.. zakone i „pravoslavnost naãeg naåina æivota“. N° 9 – vapi za wim i u – besmislu – svakodnevnice – traæi ono Tamo. pre svega u Dogaœaju najerosnijeg. zapitanosti. poredak. u Liturgiju. Hristov æivot u nama. Evharistija i bogoslovqe u taj ‘naåin æivota’ unose probleme. plaãeñi se da ñe nam moæda saopãtiti neãto neoåekivano. tragizam. tj. ono Neoåekivano.Aleksandra Ãmemana: „ Jer Sveta Tajna jeste eshatoloãka i kao takva se ne uklapa u ‘naåine æivota’. najbitnijeg. 1998: 45 9 . Bogoslovqe se „mesi“7 i unosi tamo gde mu je i mesto. neãto od åega bi morali da mewamo naãu zacementiranu ispravnost. forsirawem „pravoslavnog naåina æivota“ (!) „zaobiœemo“ susret sa Drugim. nije åak ni zanimqiva misao. gresima. tj. od onog straãnog iskustva neprisutnosti Drugog. 7 8 Pokajawem. Mesto zajedniåkog spaãavawa sveta i biña od smrti. 384). Neliturgijsko bogoslovqe.. Liturgija je najprirodnije Mesto na kome i u kome se odigrava Dogaœaj Dolazak Drugog. Mesto na kome je „sve neãto drugo“. æivota koji se „pre groba veñ nalazi u Vaskrsewu9“. postom. molitvom. Lestviånik. tj. savetovawa. tragawe. str. nespremnoãñu. svim onim ãto zovemo askeza ili podvig. Setimo se samo o. Pokuãavajuñi da pravdawima.

tj. takoœe i Dar10. Æivota koji Dolazi. Da blagodarimo. Novo Jelo i novo Piñe. Blagodarewe Onome Kome mi jedino to i moæemo. biñe nadahnuta. koji neprestano iznova Dolazi. Trpeza Carstva koje je veñ . Deridina teorija dara kao da nastoji da se pribliæi tajni Hristove ærtve. i onim istim „Dolaskom Jedinog 10 Æak Derida ( Jacques Derrida ) ñe opisati ekonomiju dara kao naåin razmene gde se namiruje raåun: dar je uistinu dar onda kada se poklawa bez oåekivawa da se uzvrati.Kriza pojmova – kritiåki pristup nadahnut „personalistiåkom ontologijom“ Nisu dovoqne reåi. buduñi do Dolaska Drugog Tamo kao veñ .oprisutwewe „slatke“ Hrane i Piña besmrtnosti. koji dolazeñi – donosi. iznenaœuje davawem. Darovawe buduñeg æivota.sasvim Ovde. osmiãqena „otvorenoãñu Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. daruje. poklawa.sada ali ne . „Nova Tvar“. ono „Drugo“.. i bez duga koji prethodi. veka one govore. kao i celini rada. da me vrate u æivot.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 29 Bogoslovqe je. samo obiåne reåi. Ali. proæeta. Bogoslovqe je blagodarewe. hermeneutiãu? 2. Novi i neprestani Dar qubavi i slobode kojim se grobovi prazne od smrti. ãta sve ove reåi i izrazi nama danas znaåe? Ãta åoveku 21. ili dara bez kalkulacije. takoœe apsolutnog dara. .prisutno neponovqivo – neoåekivano . saopãtavaju. EKV Sva naãa promiãqawa u ovom poglavqu. bivajuñi liturgijsko i epikleptiåko..

tj. mora da bude iskrena sama sa sobom i u najboqem asketsko – otaåkom i jevanœelskom duhu. danas Gospod Isus Hristos. i ostale „temeqne“ pojmove hriãñanskog uåewa? • Usahle forme crkvenog æivota ne mogu se analagno lepiti na savremenost: Æeqa za ãto autentiånijim æivqewem ranog. naziva. stvarawe sveta iz niåega. nerazdeqivost prirode. spasewe. naivne bajke? Ãta moæe savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve danas sa svim ovim hitnim pitawima? Pre svega. Teologija i Jezik. Beograd. pravoslavnog hriãñansva je viãe nego za pohvalu.30 Teoloãki åasopis. 1998. npr: • Stari pojmovi priliåe vremenu kada su nastali: Kako objasniti sebi i svetu pojmove poput: jednosuãtnost. za nas. Takoœe. imena. ipostas. kenoza. Evharistija. prvo da „izvadi brvno iz oka svoga“. imenica. Carstvo Boæije. predawskog. Bogoslovqe je previãe zarobqeno u svoj istorijski jezik. ikonomija. Vaskrsewe. pa tek onda da ukaæe na brvna i u ostalim oåima. . N° 9 Novog i Drugog. idioma i ostalog? Jesu li ovo samo stare reåi. molitva. otaåkog. æeqa za ãto „monaãkijim i manastirskijim“ naåinima åekawa Dolaska 11 Sjajna studija za razmatrawe ovog problema: Stilijan Papadopulos. post. podvig? Ãta nama predstavqa åitava enciklopedija hriãñanskih termina. Pogledajmo kakav je jezik bogoslovqa danas11. duhovnost. logosi biña. Ko je. æivot veåni. seña li se neko joã ãta je to Sveta Trojica? Ãta nama danas znaåe Crkva. ali samo pod uslovom onog veñ mnogo puta ovde ponovqenog „osmiãqavajuñeg – prizivawa“ Novog. naåin postojawa. Donoseñeg -Neoåekivanog i Buduñeg. Hriãñanska misao. crkvena terminologija iz proãlosti vredna areheoloãkog prouåavawa. reåi. Ovo je naã hermeneutiåki kquå kojim pokuãavamo da otvorimo vrata problema. Dolazeñeg. Hrista“. ãta danas znaåi reå Bog. Jedinorodni.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 31 Hristovog takoœe moæe imati svoju zdravu primenu samo pod uslovima da „nekako“ iznaœemo naåina da ceo svet strpamo u manastire i peñine. Iako je istraæivawe starih problema neophodno. „religijsko“. ) . Hristom. a posebno sa onim sasvim Drugim. „druãtveno – politiåki – prilagodqivo“. biñe dovoqni i naåini da se u qudsku i æivotnu svakodnevnicu udahne sveæ vazduh Onoga Koji „diãe gde hoñe“. Do tada. „zanimqivo“. ono ipak danas ne moæe da bude primarno. ipak. vode bogoslovqe. Strah od sveta. tj. za obiåan svet koji ostaje van tog supermen molitvenog prostora. muzeje. koncertne dvorane. problemima koji su nekada davno bili aktuelni i vaœewem istih na povrãinu savremenosti. U hriãñansko – Iako postoji obiqe literature za ovaj problem. „Boæijom pravdom i promislom“ i zatvarawem u iste (jer se u takvim apstrakcijima jedino oseña sigurnim). isti je onom strahu od susreta sa drugim – bliæwim. Rijeka. police. mrtvo!12 Hrabro suoåavawe sa rugobama ovog sveta tek predstoji. bacaju ga u fioke. tj. • Problemi sa kojima se bogoslovqe suoåava su bezvremeni i nerelevantni danas: Veñ pomenuto bavqewe „istorijom bogoslovqa“ tj. galerije. tj. 12 . 2008. dehumanizacije u nauci. mi smo posebnu paæwu poklonili mislima zapadnog teologa Jirgena Moltmana ( Jurgen Moltmann ) u wegovoj åuvenoj kwizi „Raspeti Bog“ ( Ex Libris. problema. mi zapadamo u oåitu nerelevantnost pred svetom. odnosno tamo gde je ono „neproblematiåno“. „umetniåko – vrednosno“. idr. Strah bogoslovqa da se suoåi sa savremenim „bezboænostima“ pod izgovorom romantiånog bavqewa evharistijom. eshatologijom. „istoriåno – nacionalno“. nakaznosti åovekove svakodnevnice. i to onim mestima gde se govori o neidentitetu i nerelevantnosti savremenog hriãñanstva ( iz ovih misli pravoslavni bi mnogo mogli da nauåe).

Jezik savremenog bogoslovqa. • Govor o Bogu. Naãe bogoslovqe je. . Sarajevo. danas. O gramatologiji. jezika koji – ne – dopire – dodrugog Tek ovaj problem iziskuje jednu celu studiju. Pisawe i razlika. 2008. jedan muzejski eksponat kome se jedni dive. svetu odvija se u okviru nekada – davnog – arhaiånog jezika. jedna recipirana istorija teologisawa. Ãahin Paãiñ. 13 Za pojam „traga“ u savremenoj filosofiji videti: Æak Derida. ali i hriãñanstva. koje se nalazi „pre licem sveta“ najåeãñe je: • Onaj – koji – viãe – ne – dotiåe – svet • Onaj – koji – u – istoriji – prebiva • Zakopan – u – riznici – señawa • Onaj – koji – se – samo – seña – davnine • Sahrawen – u – kwigama • Zatrpan objektivacijama • Romantiåno – bajkovit • Epski – naivan Malo je prostora na kome bismo daqe mogli razraœivati ove postavke. tj. Veselin Masleãa. tj. Sarajevo. arheoloãka iskopina koja u sebi åuva tek samo trag13 nekadaãweg – davnog odnosa sa Bogom. istorija razvoja teoloãke misli. ali obostrano åuvaju daleko od stvarnog æivota. u stvari. . samo jedan „objekt“ u rukama areheologa teologije. Ona je. åoveku. tj. za koju naæalost ovde nemamo prostora. drugi ga preziru. terminologije i problema. ali jedno je sigurno: jezik bogoslovqa u krizi prebiva.32 Teoloãki åasopis. samo jedna „istorija teologije“ tj. N° 9 pravoslavnom taboru takvog viteza – borca joã uvek åekamo da se pojavi.

itd. pokreñe iznova ovu temu u svojoj najnovijoj kwizi: “ The Weakness of God – Theology of Event”. 2008. rada. ali ne –joã . nemoñi. New York. 15 Œani Vatimo (Giani Vattimo). svetu „posle Auãvica17“?! Bogoslovqe stalno prebiva u opasnosti od eshatoloãko – evharistijskog utopizma. Xon Kaputo (John Caputo). dolazi i naãe preispitivawe: „Åemu joã bogoslovqe“?. liãavajuñi sadaãwost dinamike. 1999. i to u ovom svetu post – metafizike14 na temeqima slabe ontologije15 i Boæije slabosti16. italijanski filozof i profesor na Torinskom univerzitetu. kao stalno – dolazeñe. italijanski filosof i teoretiåar. Upravo kao veñ – sada . kao osmiãqavajuñi – od –Tamo – nas – Ovde. Zone Books.18 Setimo se da svaka utopija tovari obaveze na buduñnost. Na staro pitawe: „Åemu joã filosofija“?.10. eshatoloãko – evharistijsko bogoslovqe samim svojim naporom. 39) 18 . bez aktivne qubavi prema Hristu. danas. dovode nas u pitawe pred reåima Hristovim: „O eurwn thn yuchn auton apolesei autin. kretawem. glavni je predstavnik ove misli. videti u: Kopiñ. Sluæiti Liturgiju. ima prizvuk nelagodnosti u svetu zalivenog nihilizmom. Naivno shvañenog kao: „mi sluæimo Liturgiju“ i „molitve i posta“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 33 Bogoslovqe. ameriåki filosof religije. Indiana University Press. Svetu i bliæwem. kao kretajuñe – se – ka – nama. kai apolesas thn yuchn autou eneken emou eurnsei authn “ (Mt 10. odgovornosti. ozbiqnosti. 2008: 5 . izvijawem napred i naviãe (dakle kao svo u kretawu i 14 Reå-kovanica za åitav jedan sistem åovekove misli posle objave „smrti Boga“. moliti se i postiti. podviga. odsustva smisla. i ostale „duhovne“ radwe åiniti. 16 17 Œorœo Agamben ( Giorgio Agamben ). dotiåe se ovih tema u svom genijalnom radu “Remnants of Auschwitz”.

34 Teoloãki åasopis. jer predstavqa pokuãaj onog istog neizrecivog iskaza i opisa susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka. ispuwene i ujeziåene dogaœajem dolaska Drugog. dodir. idr. muzika. a to je opet i opet susret Svete Trojice i Åoveka20. moæe biti pokret hriãñanske teologije na Zapadu. O Teopoetici viãe videti na internet prezentaciji: http://theopoetics. Iako svoje izvore crpi u drugim oblastima qudskog stvaralaãtva. poput: susret. tj. ovde preobraæene. Bogoslovqe se. ali u okvirima svima-razumqivog i saopãtivog jezika svakodnevnog i sveopãteg qudskog æivota i iskustva. Hrista. S druge strane. 1984: 5.. zagrqaj.. nazvan Teopoetika (Theopoethics). crkvena. Teopoetika je i nama danas poziv na jedno takvo saopãtavawe sebe svetu. Poznate i razumqivo – shvatqive (srcu prijemåqive i umu osvetqavajuñe) reåi. nemajuñi „dah novog æivota“. u kojoj taj isti jezik postaje mrtav za svoju svetu – se – obrañati upotrebu. slikarstvo. gledawe.ali ne u smislu ponovne pojmovno – logiåke ograniåenosti i nemoguñnosti za izraæavawe onog liåno – qubavnog. i mi pravoslavni ne smemo hladno zaobiñi postojawe jedne takve zanimqive i originalne misli. veñ jedan jezik svakodnevnice. hriãñanska. jedan jezik – susret. polako pretvara ( ili se veñ pretvorilo? ) u jezik nemuãtih bogoslovskih unutraãwih trvewa. 20 Veoma zanimqiva misao za pravoslavno bogoslovqe danas. ona ostaje izvorno svetopisamska. sasvim Drugog. pretvara se u jedan „klovnovski jezik“. unapred åuva sebe od pasivno – nepokretne neistine romantiåarskog eshatoloãko evharistijskog utopizma. ne smemo zaboraviti ni kolosalnu misao rimokatoliåkog teologa Hans Urs von . moæda jedan meta – jezik?. kwiæevnost.19 Da li bogoslovqe zato potrebuje jedan novi jezik. tj. N° 9 razrastawu). film.net/. mogu ponovo pronañi mesta u opisu onog dogaœaja o kome bogoslovqe blagovesti. poezija. dakle. npr. 19 Ratzinger. qubqewe. itd.

3. ili u ãta sve bogoslovqe moæe da se pretvori.Kriza crkvenog æivota (kratak pregled) U pokuãaju da odgovorimo na teãko pitawe ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude (u svetlu autentiånog crkvenog. s jedne strane. Hrista. tj. poput Aleksandra Ãmemana (delimiåno se Baltazara (Hans Urs von Balthasar) i wegov projekat Teologike (Theologik). Bogoslovqe je jedno jeziåko pounutrewe opisa susreta izmeœu Onog sasvim Drugog.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 35 Na mesto „mrtvog jezika“ treba doñi „jezik susreta“.. on se gradi. on ne postoji pre susreta. . Wegova prava upotreba æivi jedino u tom dogaœaju. Teodrame (Theodramatik) i Teoloãke estetike (Theologische Ästhetik). jezik koji ne postoji van Drugog. koje Ja ima tek sa Ti. tj. i pokuãaja da daqe razradimo probleme koje smo gore naveli. on nastaje u osluãkivawu Duha koji dolazi. evharistijskog i qubavno – slobodnog hriãñanskog æivota koji „zastupa“ personalistiåka ontologija). tj. dolazimo do neizbeæne åiwenice i pitawa ãta sve od toga bogoslovqe nije. Taj jezik mora iznova da najavquje. a ne zaokruæuje istinu. Åoveka.. monolog bogoslovskog jezika je smrt istog. i samim tim dovede do jednog diskutabilnog naåina æivota u savremenoj crkvenosti. Ja Crkve je potpuno „bezjeziåno“ bez Ti Drugog. na misao savremenih bogoslova Crkve. Koji donoseñi konstituiãe za moguñnost razgovora. Jezik bogoslovqa je jezik dijaloga. da ga odvede u krizu? Oslawajuñi se. tj. tj. u ãta sve moæe da mutira i pseudomorfira (kada ono nije obasjano svetlom autentiånosti pomenutog). Svete Trojice i onog bez – ontoloãkog – temeqa – trenutno – ovde – prisutnog. u tom deãavawu.

Ovde ñemo postaviti 21 Ãmeman. naravno ne pretendujuñi da zaokruæimo sistem i zakquåimo problem. napisano. savremenog druãtva. Joã tragiånije i paradoksalnije je ãto ono ne dopire ni do uãiju samih „bogoslova“ i hriãñana. kako. o tome je veñ mnogo toga reåeno. izbegavajuñi preteranu samodopadnost i kritiku. iznutra doæivimo i shvatimo. kada. Hristosa Janarasa. N. pritom åvrsto se dræeñi smernica i puteva ãto su ih savremeni pravoslavni bogoslovi (a posebno ovde aktuelna „personalistiåka ontologija“ mitropolita Zizjulasa ) odredili i dijagnosticirali. Pre svega. Mi æelimo da proãirimo vidik ovog problema.. idr. tj. Janarasa. razmatrano i moæe se nañi u mnogobrojnoj literaturi koja je svima dostupna22. Afanasjeva. jedna od najtragiånijih posledica krize jeste organsko razdvajawe bogoslovqa od evharistije i poboænosti. Ãmemana. I ne samo to. i dr. rastegnemo. 2008: 21. Åoveka.36 Teoloãki åasopis. a s druge na samo liåno iskustvo naãeg parohijskog crkvenog æivota. od Crkve kao „zajednice svetih i zajednice u svetiwi“21. a) Bogoslovqe – Liturgija – Poboænost Na predhodnim stranama smo pouãali da osvetlimo problem onoga ãto smo nazvali „ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude“. nama je interesantan problem „neaktuelnosti bogoslovqa za savremeni svet“. bogoslovqe danas teãko dopire do uãiju sveta. i to najviãe iz liånog iskustva. pokuãañemo da dijagnosticiramo gde. veñ da ga uz pomoñ pomenute „otvorenosti Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“ joã viãe proãirimo. . 22 Radovi savremenih nam bogoslova: G. Iz tog ugla moæemo i uoåiti wegove danaãwe nedostatke. Majendorfa. J. Rekli smo veñ da zarobqeno u svoj arhaiåni jezik. A. Georgorija Florovskog. Florovskog. H. promislimo. N° 9 koristeñi wegovom razradom problema u okvirima ãeme Liturgija – Bogoslovqe – Poboænost). Pre svega. Ali. i ko je uzroånik krize.

smisao? Naã odgovor je: ne. predawima. post. itd. istinitijeg i veñeg izvora bogoslovstvovawa od samog æivota neke liånosti i same Crkve i problema koje æivot donosi pred æivot svake liånosti posebno. 2008: 511 – 519. „tumaåewima“. Crkva. bogoslova i pesnika æivota i erosa prema Svetoj Trojici i monaãko – asketska figura oca Vasilija Gondikakisa. åak i na strani „evharistijsko eshatoloãkih“ bogoslova. svimapoznatu.. a koliko u æivom sustretu. sve zahvaqujuñi tome ãto ne postoji 23 24 Isto. istinsku punoñu. kao: spasewe. sloboda. na Svetoj Gori Atonskoj! . Hristos. posebno od evharistije kao „glavnog izvora“23. ontologija. nemaju! I to ne samo u svojoj recipiranosti od strane onih koji primaju i prihvataju te pojmove. Veñ smo se pitali ãta danas savremenom åoveku i hriãñaninu znaåe tradicionalni temeqni pojmovi bogoslovqa. ãta sa sobom danas nose? Da li i daqe imaju svoju samorazumqivu. krajwem! Izuzetak. pak. liånost. spisima. pravoslavqe. erosnom. nada. Odvojeno od svojih izvora. predstavqa laiåko bogoslovska liånost i misao poznatog Hristosa Janarasa. askeza. Sveta Trojica. Pitamo se: ima li znaåajnijeg. I joã: koliko moæemo susresti Svetu Trojicu u kwigama. Åudna je åiwenica. vera. Da pogledamo malo bliæe ovaj problem. odvojeno od æivota (kao moæda i „najglavnijeg izvora“24 ) bogoslovqe se polako prazni od svojih sadræaja koji poåivaju u wegovim pojmovima. „stvarnom“. smirewe. tekstovima. a o kojoj skoro da nema pomena u savremenoj pravoslavnoj bogoslovskoj misli. svrhu. igumana manastira Iviron. o zanemarivawu SAMOG ÆIVOTA HRIÃÑANINA kao glavnom izvoru za bogoslovqe. postajuñi glavna „inspiracija“ za susret sa Svetom Trojicom. qubavnom. qubav. ikonama. konvencionalnu. molitva. veñ su oni postali ispraæweni u sebi samima.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 37 jednu „opasnu“ tezu o ispraæwewu pojmova i sadræaja bogoslovqa. ãta oni govore. Bog. duhovnost. vaskrsewe.

postoji mnoãtvo religija koje se pozivaju na pravoverno tumaåewe istog. takav kakav je i nijedan drugi.biznis institucija. ili kao nacional – institucija – åuvar. usled svoje „greãnosti i sekularizovanosti“ neñe da åuje za hriãñanstvo. naravno. dakle. od Duha i od Darodavca istih. stvari su joã teæe sa klasiåno hriãñanskim pojmovima. jer. duhovnost. jedino isti ti hriãñani mogu ponovo oæiveti svoje pojmove i uåiniti ih razumqivim i spasavajuñim. Ãta tek reñi za pojmove: spasewe. Nije dovoqno reñi samo: „Bog“ i oåekivati saglasnost svih oko ovog „termina“. naã dvig ka Wemu. oni ne samo da postaju neaktuelni. razumevawa. Tako. N° 9 neka zasebna „ontologija pojmova“25 nezavisno od liånosti i zajednice koje ih razumeju i daju im smisao i semantiåko znaåewe. ali Koji potrebuje naã priziv. Mada. danas reå „Crkva“ veñini zvuåi ili kao druãtveno – humanitarno .. naãe æivqewe. veñ uvek otvoreni za „dogaœaj dolaska Drugog“ u naãu aktuelnost i savremenost. u ovom sluåaju savremenih qudi i hriãñana. veñ da su sami hriãñani „ubili“ svoje sopstvene znakove sporazumevawa. priznajemo sa æaqewem. veñ postaju mrtvi! Dolazimo do uvida da. Neshvatawem i neæivqewem istinskog smisla koju pojmovi imaju u sebi26. . u ovaj naã æivot. 26 Kao oni koji iako jednom definisani nikada nisu zacementirani. oni su danas postali autonomni i samodovoqni pamfleti kojima hriãñani neuspeãno pokuãavaju da predstave svoj identitet i 25 Papadopulos. nerecipirani i nerazumqivi.. ili u najboqem sluåaju kao joã jedna grupa koja se „bavi duhovnoãñu“. S druge strane. åak i oni „van Crkve“ mogu nas mnogo nauåiti tome. darovi! Odvojeni od Spasiteqa.38 Teoloãki åasopis. Ali. odnoãewa ka svetu i ka sebi samima. Tako. oni se pretvaraju u znakove – tragove iza kojih zjapi praznina od ispraæwenosti smisla i naznaåewa. 1998: 53. nije samo „svet“ onaj koji.

„starinama“. Za proseånog hriãñanina. Ali o tome je joã davno mnogo reåeno. ili neãto tako sliåno. bogosluæewa uopãte kao „dela naroda“. pokuãavajuñi s tim da poveæemo problem bogoslovqa. jer nam je ona najoåiglednija u aktuelnom æivotu naãe pomesne Crkve i wenih parohija. ili bivajuñi izvor istog.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 39 svoju posebnost u odnosu na druge27. jedna bezbogoslovska liturgija i jedna neevharistijska poboænost (s tim da su meœusobne varijante istih bezbrojne)? Laænu reå. a svi zajedno odvojeni od æivota. Mi upuñujemo na joã ãire posmatrawe problema. posledica su ove razdvojenosti. . „obiåajima“. uzdasi.od – muåewa – u – paklu“ konotaciju. poboænosti. liturgije. kakvu stvarnost. tako i mrtvoj poboænosti prete iste nepogode. naivnost. Kakvu reå. ne moæemo prenebregnuti problem svojevrsne „poboænosti“ koja se raœa u trenucima kada neevharistijsko bogoslovqe preokupira naãu paæwu i naãe poboæne postupke. teatralnost. gluma. „spasiti se“ najåeãñe sa sobom ima druãtveno – ekonomsku ili „spasiti – se . Naravno. tj. marame i ãamije. hiperrealno posto27 Za ovu tvrdwu namerno ne navodimo nikakvu referencu. tj. „askezama“. kakvu autentiånost. bogosluæewe se pretvara u pojavu koju ovako definiãemo: sentimentalno señawe na davne dogaœaje iz æivota Hristovog. to sve dotiåe i crkvenu poboænost kao izraz bogoslovqa i bogosluæewa. Problema koji se javqaju u obzorju smrti åoveåije i wegove prolaznosti. mrtvu stvarnost. bezidentitetnost. maske. Imajuñi pred sobom „krizirajuñe“ bogoslovqe. S tim povezan i uslovqen jeste problem liturgije. imitacija æivog æivota Crkve. „praksama“. kakav æivot svetu i åoveku moæe ponuditi jedno razcrkvqeno bogoslovqe. Problemi koji se javqaju u „naåinima“ sluæewa. Neaktuelnost. bogosluæewe i poboænost su odvojeni od bogoslovqa i obrnuto. Kao i mrtvom bogoslovqu. Ipak. Problem jezika bogosluæewa nemamo hrabrosti ni da zapoåenemo. U suãtini.

Tako i samo tako. tj. saborni. obiåaja. . tj. ali mrtvih eksponata. mræwa. tj. 28 Zizjulas. pored reåenog. za dogaœaj veånog æivota. Evharistije. uãivawem u mrtve kalupe æivota. N° 9 jawe. itd. mogli bismo se dotañi joã mnoãtva velikih i malih problema koji uznemiravaju savremeni crkveni æivot. samo Tu moæe biti pojmova o pojmovima istinskog. evharistijska liturgija. kao Mesta na kome Jedan postaje mnogi i mnogi postaju Jedan28 i Crkve kao zajednice „dolazeñeg . hriãñana. liturgije i poboænosti jeste sam æivot Crkve. „pravoslavnih etika“. To su plodovi ove krize savremenog crkvenog æivota. liturgija i poboænost umiru i postaju samo jedni od fosila u muzejskoj zbirci interesantnih. evharistijsko bogoslovqe.40 Teoloãki åasopis. ostvaruje sebe i svoj æivot kao æivot Crkve za dogaœaj neoåekivanog – smisla – i . æivi.æivota – Donositeqa. Odvojeno od svog prirodnog Mesta. 2004: 34. evharistijska poboænost. na tom Mestu. sam obiåan æivot svakodnevnice Crkve.Drugog“tj. sa svim svojim sivilom svakodnevnice tragedija. Izvor takvog æivog bogoslovqa. mrtvilo mrtvosti. iskustveni. neshvatawa blage vesti Jevanœeqa. ali to i nije tema ovog rada. oni postaju iznova aktuelni. za dogaœaj qubavi izmeœu Hrista i Wegove Crkve. Æivota koji je odvojen od „dogaœaja dolaska Drugog i Drugaåijeg“. pravila. znawa. koje ñe imati stvarnu vezu sa naãim æivotima. jeziåkih oblikovawa. Ko ñe nas izbaviti od smrti ove? Daqe neñemo iñi. b) Osvrt na ostale probleme Naravno. Æivota koji je smrt od poåetka do kraja. trvewa. onih qudi i hriãñana koji odriåuñi se svakog olakog definisawa. Samo Tu. preævakavawa starih floskula. moæe biti govora o govoru dolazeñeg. umirawa. samim tim i zatvoren. samo Tu moæe biti jezika o jeziku aktuelnosti. Hrista i zajednice „prizivajuñih – Drugog“ tj. iskuãewa. zakona. bogoslovqe.

Kako prosuditi sva izvitoperewa koja se javqaju u onome ãto mi zovemo „pravoslavqe“? Pravoslavqe. krstonosnim i muånim izazovom problema koji se nalaze unutar Crkve. tj. to je samo joã jedan posledica one bolesti napred formulisane. laika. Brinuñi se samo za „ontologije“. ko to sme danas da pita? Danas kada se åini da niãta nije jasnije od toga. kao jednog od temeqa bogoslovqa i iskustva Crkve. jeste. ali i unutar sveta. U stvari. Puteva kojima se oni kreñu. Wihovi. moæda? Mræwa? A ostalo? Jel’ to pravoslavqe? Za mnoge. naroåito kod epigona jednog takvog utopizma. bolesti u kojoj virus „neåeæwe za Drugim Dolazeñim“ uniãtava sve. izraza i izvoœewa bogosluæewa.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 41 Spomenimo samo to da crkveno i hriãñansko bogoslovqe stoji pred teãkim. „buduñnosti“. koji je jedan te isti æivot Crkve. Takoœe. a takoœe i za liturgijske sitnice oko pitawa pokreta. Poseban problem predstavqa pojava onog ãto smo napred nazvali „evharistijsko – eshatoloãki utopizam“. insistirawe na krajwostima ãto mogu da nastanu iz neadekvatnog shvatawa ãta znaåe reåi „evharistijski“ i „eshatoloãki“. Problemi identiteta istih. bolesti odvajawa i razdvajawa bogoslovqa – liturgije – poboænosti. ãta je to? Ali. Osmiãqavaju æivot svoj. Mnoge se pojave proglaãavaju pravoslavnim. koji je najåeãñe daleko od takvih „izmiãqenih problema“ koje utopijski bogoslovi hoñe da nametnu. pred nama stoje problemi klira. da li je to pravoslavqe? A ekspanzionistiåki ãovinizam? Homofobija. postaje danas ne mali problem. . posebno Novog Zaveta. Ipak. na æalost. zanemarivawem onoga ãto Crkva „kao zajednica buduñnosti“ jeste. mnogo je nejasno. Zanemarivawe Svetog Pisma Crkve. Relevantnosti. a pritom nemaju nikakvih suãtinskih veza sa pravoslavqem kao „iskustvom susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka“. „eshatologije“. Nacionalizam. ovi epigoni zanemaruju probleme Crkve koji su problemi ovog – ovde svakodnevnog æivota. Nama nije jasno. pak. monaha i wihove svojevrsne teoretske i stvarne razdvojenosti. antagonisti s druge strane.

iãåekivawe.42 Teoloãki åasopis. Problem ekumenizma. Åeka. Bioetiåki problemi i iskuãewa tehnologije i kibernetike. tj. tj. i to ñe.. Vapi za Onim koji jedini moæe „doneti“ problemima otvarawe. koja je uvek saborna. tj. to je prevelika tema za ovaj premali prostor. Strepi. do iznemoglosti. evharistijska i na-zajednicu-dolazeñegCarstva-upuñujuña. razmekãavawe. problemi. N° 9 istiåu nedostatak aktivizma. uvek liturgijska. Nada se. otvarawe. neiskustvenog). kao „znaka Carstva Boæijeg“. itd. Ali. Svetlo „personalistiåke ontologije“ mitropolita Zizjulasa moæe zasvetliti. o opasnosti wene otrgnutosti od smisla prave crkvene katiheze. promisliti mesto veronauke kao joã jednog od „predmeta“ u sistemu dræavnog obrazovawa (deduktivno – racionalistiåkog. Problem Crkve i politike. Oåekuje. uvek zajedniåka. . sa trezvenoãñu. osoqavawe. problemi. dok Dolazeñi ne doœe. borbe za mesto u druãtvu. Problemi dehumanizacije. makar malo. Problem katiheze. Problemi. biti dovoqno. 29 Potrebno je iznova. ali opet promaãujuñi istinski smisao Crkve. Ali samo ako bude daqi podstrek za joã jaåe traæewe. veronauke u ãkolama29. za poåetak. Traæi. osmiãqavawe. Ostaje joã gomila problema pred kojim Crkva stoji. tj.

Sveta Gora Atonska: Hilandar. Beograd: Obraz svetaåki. Kopiñ. Jaques 2004. Jurgen 2008. Sremski Karlovci: Kwiæarnica Zorana Stojanoviña. The Weakness of God . Uvod u krãñanstvo. Aleksandar 2008. Pisanje i razlika. Beograd: Hriãñanska misao. Zagreb: Krãñanska misao. Moltmann. Stilijan 1998. John 2008.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 43 BIBLIOGRAFIJA Zizjulas.The Theology of Event. . Jovan 1998. Mario 2008. Lestviånik. Rijeka: Ex Libris. Teologija i jezik. Jovan 2004. Naã æivot u Hristu. Sarajevo: Ãahin – Paãiñ. Evharistija i Carstvo Boæije. Raspeti Bog. Chicago: Indiana University Press. Hristov æivot u nama. Ãmeman. Derrida. Joseph 1984. Caputo. Papadopulos. Ratzinger. Novi Sad: Beseda. Izazovi post – metafizike.

koji se javqa kroz delovawe Svetog Duha.rs Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: pisani i slikani izvori Rezime U ovom radu ñe se govoriti o simbolici hriãñanskog praznika Pedesetnica. Na dan Pedesetnice.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 45 dr Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoqiñ UDK 291.02.36 Fakultet za kulturu i medije. u ovom radu je naglasak na istraæivawu simbolizma pojedinaånih likovnih elemenata (boje. geometrije. 11 070 Novi Beograd Originalni nauåni rad vcvetkovska-ocokoljic@megatrend.01.2010 Megatrend univerzitet Prihvañeno: 18.edu. kolebqivu ali veoma vaænu ulogu u prenoãewu Predawa. opisan je na ikonama praznika Pedesetnica. S obzirom na to da je kroz istoriju hriãñanstva slika imala. i svakome daje posebne darove.2010 Goce Delåeva 8. ovaj praznik je posebno vaæan jer Sveti Duh silazi na svakog ålana Crkve. ikona. Sveti Duh. . Takoœe. wihovom poreklu i wihovoj ulozi u prenoãewu nevidqivog sveta materijalnim sredstvima izraæavawa na ikoni Pedesetnica. Kquåne reåi: Pedesetnica. Naroåito je vaæan dogaœaj u kome apostoli govore razliåitim jezicima i razumeju se meœusobno. perspektive). Primljeno: 21. simbolizam. Taj naroåiti dar. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole i obnavqa jedinstvo Boga i qudi kroz duhovnu izgradwu Crkve. ponaosob. kroz pisane i slikane izvore.

kada su stvoreni uslovi za wen pun æivot.46 Teoloãki åasopis. koje izraæavaju razliåita znaåewa 1 Jovanoviñ. oboæewe apostola i poåetak duhovnog puta. Uloga ikone – kao religijske slike bila je kolebqiva u hriãñanskoj istoriji. meœutim wen opstanak govori o tome da posredstvom we. a dvanaestorica apostola udostojeni da svedoåe o Hristu. opipqivim sredstvima izraæavawa vekovima je bila u sluæbi religije. Prema reåima Uspenskog s obzirom na to da se u pravoslavnoj Crkvi praznik Svete Trojice slavi na prvi dan Pedesetnice (u nedequ) i da se na taj dan kroz bogosluæewe izraæava dogmatsko uåewe o Svetoj Trojici. . te je stoga odreœeno kao civilizacija slike. Åovekova potreba da nevidqivo predstavi materijalnim. N° 9 Uvod Savremeno druãtvo ispuweno je brojnim slikama. Æeqa åoveka da dosegne duhovne visine i danas je podjednako aktuelna a civilizacijski razvoj nije uspeo da zadovoqi wegov unutraãwi svet. propovedaju i åine åuda“1. Ikona Pedesetnice stoga ima podjednaku vaænost ali i dodatnu vrednost jer se na dan Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispunilo obeñawe Hrista. a sledeñi dan (Duhovski ponedeqak) je posveñen Svetom Duhu. Sveti Duh je izlio svoje brojne darove na prisutne i omoguñio poåetak stvarawa zemaqske Crkve po uzoru na nebesku. ove dve ikone. 2005: 387. Trojice i Trojiåin dan. Ovim praznikom proslavqa se „zavrãni åin osnivawa Hristove Crkve na zemqi. åovek moæe sozercati nevidqivog Boga i ugledati se na svetiteqe i muåenike. Poreklo praznika pedesetnica Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole spada u Velike praznike a poznat je pod imenima: Duhovi.

kao señawe na unutraãwe jedinstvo.11). Poreklo praznika Pedesetnica potiåe iz Starog Zaveta. Vernici doæivqavaju Boæiju stvarnost kao i prvi hriãñani. Tako se kroz ikonu Svete Trojice daje nagoveãtaj tajnovitosti Boæanskog postojawa. kad sabereã trud svoj sa wive“ (2 Moj. Benc.16). Poseban znaåaj ova dva praznika objediwuje se u vidqivom silasku Svetog Duha na apostole. odgovaraju prazniku Pedesetnica2. kada je Mojsije primio Zakon na Sinaju. u vaskrslom Gospodu Isusu Hristu. Praznik 2 3 4 5 6 Uspenski. 3. na pedeseti dan posle Pashe. ovaj praznik je imao i drugo znaåewe. u krãtewu Crkve ogwem i Svetim Duhom. 23. O danu odmora. i praznik berbe na svrãetku svake godine. uzviãenom u Boga i u Svetom Duhu koji se razliåitim darovima Duha moñno pojavqivao meœu wima“4. u znak zahvalnosti prema Bogu. Sin se vratio Ocu. stvarawe saveza izmeœu Boga i izabranog naroda. 2003: 120. „Kada je wegovo poslawe okonåano.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 47 i smisao. On je proslavqan i kao zahvalnost za prve plodove na zemqi. pedeset dana nakon Hristovog vaskrsewa i deset dana nakon wegovog vaznesewa. u skladu sa reåima svetog Jovana Preteåe (Mat. buduñi da ga ãaqe Otac i da ga predaje Sin5. a Sveti Duh je siãao kao Liånost“6. 2006: 520. dok Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole otkriva promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta3. 2008: 208. Evdokimov: 2009: 230. Loski 2008: 202. buduñu æetvu i kao dan (dar) Gospoda: „I praznik æetve prvina od truda tvojega ãto posijeã u poqu svojem. Isto. Silazak Svetog Duha predstavqa drugo delovawe Oca jer Otac najpre ãaqe Sina a zatim i Svetog Duha. Slavqen po isteku sedam nedeqa. . Tako Sveti Duh ispuwava opãtu voqu tri Lica. u trostrukom obliåju: „u Tvorcu i Gospodu istorije spasewa. Loski.

Æivot Crkve. javqa se novozavetni Savez.3). naåelo u skladu sa kojim Crkva æivi i gradi Boæije kraqevstvo na zemqi“8. sledi Liturgiju i stvara jednu ogromnu perspektivu koja prevazilazi okvire istorijskog fragmenta da bi izrazila ‘unutraãwu reå’ dogaœaja“ 10. „Tako blagodat zakona data Svetim Duhom preuzima mesto zakona sa Sinaja“7. dræeñi svitke ili kwige u rukama.26). kroz silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. Loski 2008: 202. U skladu sa starozavetnim savezom koji je naåinio Bog izmeœu sebe i qudi. nijednoga posla ropskoga ne radite“ (4 Moj.48 Teoloãki åasopis. Isto. åine apostoli koji sede polukruæno postavqeni i plameni jezici koji sa neba silaze na wihove glave: „I pokazaãe im se razdijeqeni jezici kao ogweni. N° 9 Nedeqa se kao señawe na dan otkrivewa zakona uobliåio kao duhovni i materijalni dar od Boga: „I na dan prvina kad prinosite nov dar Gospodu poslije svojih nedeqa. zapravo posledica Ovaploñewa. jer je tvorevina postala sposobna da primi Sveti Duh. Apostoli su predstavqeni potpuno smireno. ili u æivom meœusobnom zajedniåarewu. Tako je Pedesetnica. kako se uobiåajeno prikazuje. . Osnovne kompozicione elemente ikone Pedesetnica. koja je izdvojena prirodom i mnoãtvom liånosti. i time je ostvaren konaåni ciq Boæanstvenog domostroja na zemqi9. povezan je suãtinski s ovim uåewem. Ikona Pedesetnice „objediwuje sve tekstove Svetog Pisma. Evdokimov: 2009: 232. 2008: 209. da imate sabor sveti. Kwige i svitci ukazuju na buduñu misiju apostola. Posebna vrednost ikone Pedesetnica je u tome ãto „izraæava najpotpuniju dogmu praznika povezanog sa osnovnom dogmom hriãñanstva – Trojedinim Bogom. 28. na wihovo propo7 8 9 10 Uspenski. i siœe po jedan na svakoga od wih“ (Dap. 2003: 122. jer je Trojiånost. Loski. 2.

koji deli apostole. (1976: 73-76). Weitzmann. . Vremenom ñe se ustaliti izobraæavawe najpre praznog. Na woj su prikazane åetiri scene u tri reda: Na vrhu ikone prikazana je scena Roœewe Isusa Hrista a odmah pored we. Princeton University Press. u dve grupe. u istom nivou scena Predstavqawe u hramu. u sredini je scena Vaznesewa a u dowem delu. 1990: 98). koji su bili prisutni u trenutku ovog velikog dogaœaja (Dap 2. Naroåito interesantan je srediãwi deo ikone. izviru iz kruæne mandorle (medaqona) u kojoj je Hristos. Rani prikazi praznika pedesetnica Najstarija poznata ikona na kojoj se pojavquje silazak Svetog Duha na apostole – Pedesetnica (Penthkosth) potiåe iz 7. ?. tamnog. veka11 i nalazi se u manastiru Sveta Katarina. str. kao nevidqivo prisustvo Hrista – Glave Crkve. K.59). gde jarko crveni zraci koji se spuãtaju na apostole. na Sinaju. prikazana je scena Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. veka ili poåetak 10. Ova ikona predstavqa jednu od najstarijih grupnih ikona koja pokazuje izdvojene teme. ali je najåeãñe prostor ostavqen prazan. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai.4). slika 7. 2. Vidi u Weitzmann. prikaz starca-kraqa (kosmos) a povremeno i qudskih figura koje simbolizuju predstavnike razliåitih naroda. vek. U tom srediãwem delu je ponekad prikazana Bogorodica (kao simvol Crkve). veka (Manafis at al. u monografiji Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery. polukruænog prostora ispod apostola. Takoœe. na Tajnoj veåeri uspostavqena Evharistija – hleb i vino). koji sede u gornici (koja simvolizuje nastavak propovedi jer je u gornici. izbor najvaænijih 11 Ozoqin ikonu datira u 7. 140. Vajcman ovu ikonu datira u 10.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 49 vedawe a gestikulacija i razgovor ukazuju na silazak Svetog Duha „i ispuniãe se svi Duha Svetoga i stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima“ (Dap. a potom unutar tog prostora. ikona je datirana u drugu polovinu 9. vek.

98-99. koga ñe otac poslati u ime 12 13 14 Manafis. u åetrdeseti dan posle Vaskrsa i Silaska Svetog Duha. izmeœu apostola. Jer i Pasha naãa Hristos.50 Teoloãki åasopis. nadnosi nad qude i usinovquje ih. veka“14. prinoseñi åoveka kao dar Bogu. u skladu sa Prvom poslanicom Korinñanima „Odbacite. u pokretu ogwenih jezika Otac.7). da bude novo tijesto. . Sveti Duh u obliku goluba se pojavquje prethodno na krãtewu Isusa Hrista. kao ãto ste beskvasni. wegov istraæivaåki rad ukazuje na to da je prvobitna ikonografija praznika Pedesetnica bila povezana sa praznikom Vaznesewe i da su pre wegovog „osamostaqewa“ rani hriãñani praznovali „osmi dan“ (Gospodwi dan) a „Dan pashe“ je slavqen kao tajna ærtve. a ispod Hrista u mandorli. jer sva kasnija izobraæewa. 1990. Ozoqin celokupnu ikonografiju naziva starohriãñanskom. 2009: 230. veñ kao tajna izbavqewa jer u pedeseti dan posle vaskrsewa Hrista. ærtvova se za nas“ (1 Kor. Interesantno je primetiti da se u sredini. dakle. Evdokimov. posredstvom Svetog Duha. potiåu iz perioda nakon ikonoborstva. koja ñe se ubrzo uobliåiti u prikaz Pedesetnice. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole u skladu sa obeñawem Spasiteqa: „A Utjeãiteq Duh Sveti. a opravdawe na sceni Pedesetnica (gde ñe se i kasnije pojavqivati povremeno) moæe se pronañi u reåima Evdokimova13 da kao ãto se Sveti Duh na dan krãtewa Gospodweg nadnosi nad qudsku prirodu Hristovu i usinovquje je. Tako se ona ne smatra samo kao posledwi dan pashalnog perioda. u pedeseti dan – znaåi veñ krajem 4. nalazi jedva primetan golub naslikan s lica (iscrtan na zlatnoj pozadini). Meœutim. 5. tako se i na dan Pedesetnice. 2007: 28. Ipak. a wena ikonografija se mewa „odvajawem praznika Vaznesewa. stari kvasac. simetriju i druge uobiåajene elemente putem kojih opisani dogaœaj otkriva sveto projavqivawe i slavu12. N° 9 kompozicionih elemenata. Ozoqin. koji su predstavqeni u sedeñem poloæaju.

16 Vidi: Slika 3 (Ozoqin. „Posledwi dan pedesetnice. gle. likovi imaju dubqe. a sa leve strane je starozavetni sveãtenik sa kadionicom u ruci17. moguñe predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha u obliku plamenih zraka. 17 S obzirom na to da na ikoni ne postoji hronoloãko vreme. u gorwem delu. pronalazi se joã na ampuli iz 6. sa pretpostavkom da se odnose na ogwene jezike silaska Svetog Duha18. veka (Bobbio. 2007: 33). Vidi: Slika 8 (Ozoqin. Iznad wene glave. 1. koji nose upaqene bakqe“.14). Jedno od utemeqewa wenog prisustva na ovoj sceni pronalazimo u pomenu zajedniåke molitve: „Ovi svi bijahu istrajno i jednoduãno na molitvi i moqewu. Sliåna predstava Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje se i na ampuli iz 10. simboliåko znaåewe u odnosu na realno prisustvo u trenutku nekog dogaœaja. U dowem delu nalazi se Bogorodica Oranta. Sa desne strane Bogorodice nalazi se sveti Jovan Krstiteq u stavu propovedawa. 2007: 46). br. Na levu i desnu grupu od Bogorodice. Meœutim. 18 19 Vidi: Ozoqin. postavqena je „zvezda prañena personifikacijama sunca i meseca. dva åovjeka u haqinama bijelim stadoãe pored wih“ (Dap.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 51 moje. Hrista na prestolu sa kwigom u ruci. u mandorli. koji blagosiqa. spuãta se po pet zraka iz Hristove mandorle. 1019). nedeqa saæima unutar sebe u jedan dan „tajinsko znaåewe pedeset dana“15.26). veka (Monza. On ñe vas nauåiti svemu i podsjetiñe vas na sve ãto vam rekoh“ (Jovan 14. prañen anœelom. 2007: 39. 2016) u sceni Vaznesewe. noãen. Ovu scenu Ozoqin naziva Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica (2007: 40). br. Na woj pronalazimo. takoœe prañen anœelom: „I dok netremice gledahu za wim kako ide na nebo. 2007: 32-36. sa æenama i sa Marijom materom Isusovom i sa brañom wegovom“ (Dap. . 1. anœelima. a ispod Hrista u mandorli. Gorwi deo scene prati iste elemente 15 Isto. 10).

koja je ispustila goluba – Svetog Duha a sa obe wene strane izviru kratki svetlosni zraci iz mandorle. Takoœe. Brojne ampule (ili åuturice) bile su åesto ukraãavane scenom svetog Mine u molitvi. Gabra (2001. 66. okruæena apostolima. 2005: 374). dakle. 1. vek) na kome je prikazan Danilo sa lavovima. godiãwe. prati isti kompozicioni obrazac kao ampula sa svetim Minom (Templ. dræaå za lampu od terakote (3. Vidi: Skalova. N° 9 predstavqawa dok je na dowem delu prikazana Bogorodica Oranta. Ozoqin21 smatra da je ovo prvo (poznato) predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole i da je usled nepostojawa posebne ikonografije vezane za ovaj dogaœaj. 1. Boæijom vaznese se“ (Dap. to je postalo sve. Ispod mandorle sa Hristom. . usmereni ka apostolima.33). U jednom egipatskom papirusu iz 3. dubqa simbolika pronalazi se u bliskoj vezi izmeœu ova dva dogaœaja jer Hristos obeñava Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole („nego ñete primiti silu kada siœe Sveti Duh“ Dap. 23). 2009: 126).9). po tipskom obrascu srebrnih ploåica. podiæe se i uze ga oblak ispred oåiju wihovih“. Tako one nisu bile usamqeni proizvodi ranih hriãñanskih umetnika veñ tipski.52 Teoloãki åasopis. serijskom proizvodu. scena prikquåena Vaznesewu. slika 20. „jer je sve to ruka moja stvorila. Takoœe se smatra da ampule22 nisu bile unikatan proizvod. veli Gospod“ (Is. 20 Likovni simvol boæanskog delovawa i spasewa. a u hriãñanskom slikarstvu se javqa od 4. i da su predstavqale neãto nalik danaãwem industrijskom. veka pomiwe se da je postojala grnåarska radionica koja je proizvodila 15 000 kråaga za vino. Grnåarija je bila jeftina i masovno se proizvodila. 21 22 Vidi: Ozoqin. poznat u antici i judaistiåkom slikarstvu. veka (Jovanoviñ. 2. nalazi se otvorena (desnica20) ruka Gospodwa jer „Desnicom.2). Dap. Meœutim. sa dve kamile koje kleåe. namewenog za prodaju hodoåasnicima.8) neposredno pre Vaznesewa („I ovo rekavãi dok oni netremice gledahu. 2007: 45-47. veñ da su se proizvodile u velikoj koliåini.

Moæe se 23 Pojedinaåni sluåajevi ovakvih scena javqañe se povremeno i kasnije. 24 Rukopis se nalazi u Lavrentinskoj biblioteci u Firenci. to jest u gornici. veka24.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 53 utvrœeni obrasci izobraæavawa scena i svetiteqa. Postavqawe plamenih jezika na oreole. U prilog tome da su one najverovatnije bile replike scena sa iluminiranih rukopisa.. Vremenom ñe se scene Vaznesewe i Pedesetnica razdvojiti23 ali ñe Bogorodica joã dugo åiniti sastavni deo brojnih ikona Pedesetnice. Loski 2008: 209. 2005: 388. 2007: 53). u kojoj su apostoli bili okupqeni u trenutku silaska Svetog Duha26. vek) sa novinom uvoœewa elementa enterijera koji ukazuje na odvijawe dogaœaja u zatvorenom prostoru. Bogorodica kao majka Crkve. 2007: 60-65). Detaqnije (Ozoqin. moæe svedoåiti sledeña opisana iluminacija.) pokazujuñi da Sveti Duh prebiva u svetima“25. zadræava srediãwe mesto u predstavi „a Gospod svaki dan dodavaãe Crkvi one koji se spasavahu“ (Dap. to jest gornicu. . kao znak prosvetqewa osnovnog åelovoœe tela i sadræanih misli (.47). Tako se scena Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje u dva sirijska rukopisa (14-16. odmah iznad glava apostola. prema reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova ukazuje na to da je Sveti Duh siãao u obliku jezika „koji su spuãteni na glave apostola. Vidi: Slika 12 (Ozoqin. ikona ili fresaka. 25 26 Uspenski. i iz åijeg kquna izlazi pomenuti plamen. Jovanoviñ. 2. Tako se ona pojavquje u saåuvanom rukopisu (Jevanœeqe iz Ravule) krajem 6. okruæena apostolima na åijim oreolima se nalaze plameni jeziåci a iznad wih je tamni svod koji se nalazi iznad celokupne grupe. Vremenom ñe se luåni (arhitektonski) svod izobraæavati kao aluzija na mesto dogaœaja. Na oreolu Bogorodice (koji je jedini pozlañen) je takoœe plameni jezik ali je on povezan sa golubom koji se nalazi iznad we i spuãta se iz nebeskog svoda.. Bogorodica je prikazana u sredini.

jednosuãtne i nerazdeqive. u manastiru Sveta Katarina. koji ostaje iza wih. a koji se prvi put pojavquje joã na pomenutoj ikoni. pojava praznog prostora moæe se pratiti joã od burnog ikonoboraåkog perioda 9. simvol Svetog Duha“27. 2008: 202. prazna stolica nije izvorno hriãñanskog porekla. Takoœe. . simvol Oca. dok ñe se uporedo sa wim razviti polukruæni prostor ispod apostola sa simvolizacijom mraka . unutar trodelne kompozicije. iz 7. Silazak Svetog Duha koji proishodi iz Oca i izliva se kroz Boga Sina (Dap.33) otkriva svetu blagodarnost bogopoznawa tajanstva Svete Trojice.neznaboæaåkog sveta. tron. ni ugotovqeni presto. odnosno konaåno ispuwewe obeñawa. 2. ñe se vremenom ustaliti. N° 9 pretpostaviti da je nebeski svod predstavqen iseåkom iznad Bogorodice i apostola preteåa uspostavqawa polukruænog prostora koji ñe se kasnije javiti. U sredini. veka. Meœutim. Tako je opisana simboliåka predstava neopisive Svete Trojice. Prema reåima Uspenskog 27 28 Ozoqin. Loski. kao i brojni drugi kompozicijski elementi i simvoli. simvolizujuñi prikaz uzlaznog puta na ikoni. Ovaj prikaz prisutan je u antici a joã ranije u scenama drevnog Egipta kao simbol prisustva nevidqivog Boga. simvol Sina. 2007: 74. a ipak razliåite“28. Obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (bez prisustva Bogorodice ali sa prikazom zlatnog goluba) koji primaju Sveti Duh. Tako dolazi do ispuwewa otkrivewa jednog Boga u tri Ipostasi. na iluminacijama iz Hludovskog Psaltira. iznad apostola. izmeœu apostola. i jedan golub na Kwizi. odreœen praznim tronom (ugotovqenim prestolom).54 Teoloãki åasopis. „Svi apostoli gledaju ka sredini gde se nalazi simboliåka predstava Svete Trojice. Uspenski. otvorena kwiga Jevanœeqa. nalazi se prazan prostor. Ova scena u skladu je sa reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova da je na dan silaska Svetog Duha na apostole projavqeno konaåno delovawe Treñe liånosti Svete Trojice kao sile osveñewa. veka.

2000: 50. 2. Kao ãto „iziœe Isus i uåaãe“ (veliko veåerwe. Ova scena kompozicijski veoma podseña na ikonu Poduåavawe u hramu. prenosi na åoveka (apostole). 5) jer Gospod kaæe: „Sabrañu sve narode“ (Joil. Od 12. Qudi na sceni simvolizuju „qude poboæne iz svakog naroda koji je pod nebom“ (Dap. 2009: 232. Otkr. izvija se i wen dowi deo obrazujuñi polukruæni tamni prostor. veka sve åeãñe se javqaju ikone Pedesetnice bez prisustva Bogorodice. dakle u gornici. postavqenih u polukrugu. Tako su „dvanaest apostola koji obrazuju jedan konaåan oblik (polukrug) predivan izraz jedinstva tela Crkve sa raznovrsnoãñu wenih ålanova“ a wihovo grupisawe je dovrãeno prazninom – nepopuwenim mestom – mestom nevidqive glave Crkve. U wemu se javqaju dva prikaza: qudi i/ili kraq. najåeãñe u æivoj gestikulaciji dok se na wihove oreole iz nebeskog svoda spuãtaju zraci Duha Svetog. Moñ propovedawa (kao jedan od darova) se sa Hrista (bogoåoveka).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 55 hriãñanstvo je u mnogoboæaåkom svetu izabralo sve ono ãto je wegovo i nazvalo ga „hriãñanstvom pre Hrista“ 29. Uspenski. Hristos nije vidqivo prisutan ali je On „Glava koja je uvek prisutna“31. Tako se uspostavqa obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (Lk. åija tela åine Crkvu. Oni se nalaze unutar enterijera.13. i primaju Sveti Duh. Evdokimov. Tako i uputstvo za izobraæavawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole (poznatom i kao Duhovi) u Kwizi popa 29 30 31 Uspenski.2). Uporedo sa izvijawem polukruæne klupe na kojoj sede apostoli. 2008: 208. Apostoli su prikazani. Loski. 20. 6. Na wenom mestu postavqen je prazan prostor koji odvaja dve grupe apostola.14) kao dvanaest plemena Izraiqa. odnosno Hristom“30. 3. . stihira glasa 2) obrañajuñi se stareãinama naroda tako su se i apostoli okupili u nedoumici oko naåina propovedawa i iãåekivawu da postanu dostojni da ãire Hristovu nauku. kroz silazak Svetog Duha.

Luka se tako nazva prvi zograf na zemqi“36. tada prinese svako svoje napisano. i u woj star åovek dræi pred sobom ubrus obema rukama. i nad domom. 2002: 319. i na ubrusu dvanaest svitaka. Jovanoviñ. N° 9 Danila32 (1674) sadræi tekst prema Isaiji: „Gospod ovo kaæe: Uzeñu vas iz svih naroda i okupiti vas iz svih plemena“33. U priruåniku za ikonopisce pod nazivom Erminija porodice Zografski34 (1728) pronalazimo sledeñe uputstvo za slikawe scene Silazak Svetog Duha: „Dom i dvanaestorica apostola sede u polukrugu. .. gore. Mediñ. 2002: 615-616. Novogradska ikona pedesetnice – silazak svetog duha na apostole Uloga ikone je da propoveda podjednako kao i reå. na glavi ima krunu i nad wim ova slova (KOZMOS?) a slavenski (M?R?). sluãajuñi glas sa nebesa. Glas sa nebesa prestade. Mediñ. i oko wega jako svetlo a dvanaest ogwenih jezika izlazi od wega i spuãta se na svakog pojedinog od tih apostola“35. 2005: 367. i ispod wih mala prostorija. Sveti 32 33 34 35 36 Poznatoj i pod nazivom Drugi jerusalimski rukopis. Kada prostreãe i proåitaãe.. Najraniji poznati prevod Erminije Dionisija iz Furne na slovenski jezik. Sveti Duh kao golub. Tu uze sveti Luka i naslika åetiri ikone gledajuñi na lice Bogorodice. Prema apokifnom jevanœequ ikona (slikana rukom åoveka) je nastala neposredno posle Jevanœeqa: „ (. I sastaviãe sveto Jevanœeqe.) I tu uzeãe hartiju i pisahu. I utvrdiãe ga u Veliki Åetvrtak.56 Teoloãki åasopis.

Telo Crkve i sklad sabornosti prikazan na ovoj ikoni izobraæavañe se vremenom na svim prikazima vaseqenskih sabora. kao znak krãtewa Duhom i vatrom jer po reåima Joila Gospod kaæe: „Izliñu od Duha mojega na svako tijelo“ (Dap. uvodeñi posmatraåa u drugu. duhovnu 37 Uspenski. Stoga su na ikoni prisutni svi apostoli. U povijenom luku ispod wih. iz razliåitih uglova) ikona o kojoj se ovde govori uspela je da saåuva vezu sa predawem u svom najåistijem duhovnom smislu. 17. vidqivim i prepoznatqivim sredstvima komunikacije. postavqen je kraq u crvenoj odeædi i sa belim ubrusom na kome se nalazi dvanaest svitaka. 2. a wen odnos koji je uvek bio „spoqa“ prema onome koji se moli. iz profila. u zatvorenoj prostoriji (gornici). Iznad. . 2000: 161. na vrhu scene prikazan je u polukrugu nebeski svod. postepeno se okreñe ka unutra.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 57 Grigorije Palama kaæe da „åovek ne moæe videti Boga drugaåije osim posredstvom simvola i telesnih praobraza“37. Joil. ka sopstvenom svetu. celina i celokupna scena imaju svoj naroåit. to jest prikazivawu viãeg.1). geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. 28-29). i 14. 2. Ona simvolizuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu. veka (Rusija). Ikona Pedesetnica – Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole pripada Novgorodskoj ãkoli iz 15. Na ikoni su prikazani apostoli koji sede na polukruæno postavqenoj klupi (eksedri). veka pojavquje manirizam u ikonopisu. svaki detaq. boæanskog sveta materijalnim. perspektiva. Na ikoni kao i na fresci. Stav koji je dominirao na ikoni ranijih vekova zamewuje se gestikulacijom. uvoœewem dimenzije stvarnog prostora i vremena (prikazivawe s leœa. Tako se Sveti Duh izliva na apostole ali i na sve prisutne „jednoduãno“ (Dap. Kompozicija. bezvremenu ravan. u mraku. eshatoloãki smisao. Iako se veñ od 13. 2. boja. iz kojeg se spuãta dvanaest ogwenih zraka ili vatrenih jezika (ovde prikazanih u tamno plavoj boji) na apostole.

jer su pojedini qudi koji su ih posmatrali govorili „nakitili su se“ ili „napili su se slatkog vina“ (Dap. celina koju obrazuju ukazuje na wihovo meœusobno razumevawe. Paris Graec. koje se na svim ikonama Pedesetnice pojavquje (Ozoqin. Pariz. delio je narode. Tako ñe se åudo izlivawa Svetog Duha u vidu dara jezika vremenom u crkvama podraæavati na sluæbi kroz pojavu poznatu kao glasolalija.10). mnogoqudnost40 koja se pomiwe u Delima apostolskim. Na ranijim prikazima. Svaki apostol je u posebnom i drugaåijem stavu i poloæaju od ostalih u skladu sa primawem raznovrsnih darova (1 Kor. 2007: 6). upravo prema reåima kondaka: „Kada je Gospod siãavãi pomeãao jezike. Wihova gestikulacija ispuwena je smirewem i skladnim poretkom. Okrenuti jedni prema drugima oni izgledaju kao da razgovaraju. folio 301). Tako se potvrœuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu jer „razliåiti su darovi ali je Duh isti“ (1 Kor. veka prema Ozoqinu. Bogosluæewe na dan Silaska Svetog Duha. Meœutim. 2009: 232. N° 9 zajednicu u kojoj liånost uzrasta38. kraj 9. kondak glasa 8). 2004: 75. jer „stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima. Vidi: Ocokoqiñ. oni åine celinu sa jedinstvenim skladom i ritmom. prikazivana je u dnu ikone (viãe 38 38 Evdokimov. a kada je delio ogwene jezike. objavquje wihovo harmoniåno zajedniãtvo. .4).4). 510. sve je pozvao u jedinstvo da sloæno slavimo Najsvetijeg Duha“ (Pedesetnica. 12. 2.13). 8. ova ikona je dodatno neobiåna jer predstavqa jedinu poznatu ikonu na kojoj nema praznog prostora izmeœu apostola. Zajedno. 2. Apostoli su izobraæeni u odeñi filosofa – uåiteqa. Oni sede na sitronu (antiåki obiåaj sedewa na polukruænoj klupi po vaænosti) a prvi meœu jednakima su apostol Petar i Pavle39. nasuprot pometwi jezika u Vavilonu. 40 Jedan od upeåatqivih primera prikazivawa mnogoqudnosti je iluminirani prikaz Pedesetnice u Besedama svetog Grigorija Bogoslova (Nacionalna biblioteka.58 Teoloãki åasopis. kao ãto im Duh davaãe da kazuju“ (Dap.

wegova crvena odora simvolizuje ærtvovawe œavolove krvi. Meœutim. a on sam je Kosmos – „priroda koju je zarobio knez ovoga sveta“. to jest svetlosti jer „zasja se lice wegovo kao svijetlost“ i haqine wegove „postadoãe bijele kao sneg“ (Mat. da svako ko vjeruje u mene ne ostane u tami“ (Jov. 17. Meœutim. uopãte.46). Joã od antike prirodna svetlost se istiåe kao uslov vidqive lepote. Starac obitava „u tamnom prostoru jer je ceo svet ranije bio bez vere. uloga zlata je dubqa jer sve boje potpadaju pod zakon prirodne svetlosti a na nebesima je Boæanska svetlost koja sve proæima. Evdokimov o ovoj neobiånoj liånosti govori kao o zarobqeniku koji je okruæen sveopãtim paklom u kome se nalazi nekrãteni svet. 2-5). apostolsku misiju Crkve i obeñawe spasewa“ 43. dakle u zatvorenoj 41 42 43 Ocokoqiñ. primetno je poistoveñivawe zlata i bele boje. on „pruæa ruke kako bi primio. Uspenski. koji su doneli svetlost åitavom svetu svojim pouåavawem“42. Na ikoni dominiraju zlatne povrãine. Evdokimov. kraqevska kruna simvolizuje greh. i on. Loski 2008: 209. Meœutim. Stoga se tama u kojoj æive neverni moæe protumaåiti kroz reåi Gospoda: „Ja u svijet doœoh kao svjetlost. simvolizuje propoved dvanaest apostola. koji vlada u svetu i belo platno u wegovim rukama sa dvanaest svitaka oznaåava dvanaest apostola. Meœutim. blagodat a dvanaest svitaka koje sa poãtovawem dræi na pokrovu. svetlost o kojoj se ovde govori nije prirodna veñ Boæanska svetlost pred kojom se svetlost sunca zamraåuje.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 59 qudskih figura) ali ñe vremenom biti zamewena simvoliånim prikazom kraqa kao personifikacije åoveka ili qudi. jer ga greh Adama åini starcem. 12. on je pognut godinama. . jer bi oblici bez svetlosti bili nevidqivi. S obzirom na to da su apostoli u gornici. Svet ili Knez Mira41. 2004: 75. Iznad wegove glave najåeãñe stoje inskripcije Kosmos. u pisanim izvorima. on govori o tome kako starac i sam æeli da se prosvetli. 2009: 233.

Kompozicija ikone graœena je tako da se otvara prema nebu. Neproporcionalnost apostola u odnosu na graœevinu potvrœuje ovo odreœewe. prvi meœu jednakima. Postavqawem dva apostola na vrhu uspostavqena je zakonitost obrnute perspektive i izjednaåena vaænost apostola (prvi meœu jednakima). tmina na prozorima simvolizuje zamraåenu prirodnu svetlost usled projavqivawa Svetog Duha.60 Teoloãki åasopis. oni isijavaju svetlost tako da na wima nema senki. N° 9 prostoriji. Svi zajedno. svojom veliåinom. 44 45 46 Templ. podjednako primajuñi Svetog Duha. . Isto. Istovremeno sa uspiwawem deãava se i silazak u tamu. 2009: 328. kao jedno telo Crkve oni duhovno uzrastaju u Hristu i uspiwu se u sozercawu Boga. Evdokimov. 2009: 148. 2009: 328. Na ikoni je arhitektura (koja uvek ima ulogu da prikaæe da se dogaœaj odvija u zasebnom prostoru) osobena i po tome ãto istovremeno vidimo i spoqaãwe i unutraãwe vidove kuñe. Sa druge strane. Graœevina na ikoni predstavqa zatvarawe od spoqaãweg (pojavnog) sveta i otvarawe ka duhovnom svetu unutar åoveka. dakle prati uzlaznu liniju åoveka u sozercawu „trojiåne energije usredsreœene u Svetom Duhu“45. apostoli su izvor svetlosti koja se izlila na wih. ka kojoj teæi stari kraq. Ikona prati naåelo obrnute perspektive u skladu sa postavqawem likova po tematskom znaåaju. „Unutraãwi ili duhovni svet je jedino stvarno mesto u nama u kome duhovni dogaœaji ne podleæu zakonima vremena i trodimenzionalnog prostora“44. Tako apostoli Petar i Pavle. preovladavaju nad ostalim apostolima. „Kontrast izmeœu ova dva sapostojeña sveta veoma je oãtar. Energije Svetog Duha dejstvuju u ciqu osloboœewa i preobraæewa zarobqenog kosmosa“46. gore je veñ „nova zemqa“ vizija idealnog Kosmosa obasjana boæanstvenim ogwem. Na taj naåin je ikonopisac uspeo da izbegne zamku iluzije prostora i obmane qudskog oka.

2009: 140. u wegovo srediãte“47. i spuãtaju na zemqu (tj. Na 47 48 49 50 Ozoqin. Meœutim. 2007: 141. U skladu sa opisanom simbolikom ona prati obrazac koji je uspostavio Templ (2009). Templ. boga ili cara. Sunce je personifikovano na antiåki naåin. uzdignutog na nivo boæanstva – boga Atona. vode poreklo joã iz drevnog Egipta. Isto. i moæe se tumaåiti i sa tog simboliåkog nivoa. vek) åiji dijagram objaãwava naåin na koji se zraci sunca spuãtaju na zemqu. Na wegovom dijagramu spuãta se deset sunåevih zraka koji obasjavaju zemqu. . Prema wegovim reåima „peñina naglaãava najniæe mesto u vaseqeni“ ali i „svetlost i tama ili najviãe i najniæe povezani su sa naåelima Boæanskog zraka (ogwa)“49. Novgorodska ikona Pedesetnice strukturno je organizovana tako da podseña na stenu sa peñinom. „Drevni Istok je kosmos predstavqao u obliku kruga ili klipeusa i stavqao „Kosmokratora“. gde izviru iz kruænog oblika sunca. Na osnovu ove sheme Templ (2009) je uspostavio pojam „vaseqenske topografije“ koja se javqa na svim ikonama. gde su simvolizovali oæivqavajuñu svetlost sunca.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 61 Zraci koji se pojavquju. u odnosu na jaåinu svetlosti (krañi i duæi zraci). na osnovu Indikoplestusove topografije. Ajnalov (1901) je prvi izneo pretpostavku o sliånosti wegovog izobraæewa sa vizantijskom pedesetnicom48. Isto. kao medaqon unutar kojeg je poprsje mladiña. qude). U skladu sa Plotinovim uåewem „celokupna vaseqena moæe biti uspostavqena kao oktava ili osmostepena lestvica do Boga ili Apsolutnog biña sa Vaseqenskom Tamom ili nivoom Apsolutnog Nebiña“50. 2007: 142. U hriãñanskom kontekstu sunåevi zraci se pronalaze joã u Hriãñanskoj topografiji Kosme Indikoplesta (6. 2009: 114. zraci svetlosti se pojavquju i u drugim kulturama.

Materije paralela se moæe pronañi sa kraqem koji prebiva u tami. 22. tj. Æitije svetog Simeona i Save. pronalazimo desnicu Boga. N° 9 nivou Carstva Tame i Zemqe. Kada se qudi „obuku u bele haqine“ biñe poput Hrista i æiveñe u sozercawu Wegovog lika „u duãi naslikana“51. Bogdanoviñ. vode i „rijeku vode æivota“ (Otkr. .62 Teoloãki åasopis. na koje se iz nebesa izliva blagodat Svetog Duha darujuñi im razne darove. Geometrijski prikaz podjednako sadræi paralele izmeœu sheme vaseqene i ikone Pedesetnica. U tami. belog goluba i/ili plamene zrake koji se spuãtaju na apostole i sve prisutne. zemaqsku Crkvu saåiwenu od qudi. Vrhovi graœevine obrazuju obrnut trougao kao simbol Svetog Duha. knez ovoga sveta. Paralela se moæe pronañi i u Templovom polukruænom prikazu nebesa sa polukruænom graœevinom na ikoni. Tako apostoli predstavqaju zemqu. na ikoni Pedesetnice. 1963: 80. Tako se potvrœuje izlivawe Svetog Duha i uzlazni put na Gospodu. Na ikoni su prema Templovom tumaåewu „liånosti i dogaœaji u potpunosti predstavqeni u vaseqenskom skladu a ne na zemqi“52. Na vrhu ikone. 7. 51 52 Vidi: Teodosije Hilandarac.1) jer iz utrobe verujuñih „poteñi ñe rijeke vode æive“ (Jn. bdi starac. u najviãem i najsvetijem delu.38). Templ. 2009: 116. koja se zavrãava plavim lukom (veñ pomiwanom na iluminaciji u Jevanœequ iz Ravule).

Sinu i Duhu. verujuñi u Jedno Boæanstvo. Crkva gradi odraz nebeskog carstva na zemqi. 2003: 120-122. Uspenski. za nas ovaploñenoga. ispuwenu blagodañu Svetog Duha. i tako daqe) zajedno odraz na zemaqskom planu Boæanskog Trojedinog æivota“55. Tako je Crkva „punota buduñi da je Duh Sveti oæivotvorava i ispuwava Boæanstvom. Dogaœajem silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispuweno je obeñawe Spasiteqa i krãtewe Crkve ogwem jer kada je Hristos proslavqen (Jn. U skladu sa izdvojenom prirodom i liånostima Svete Trojice. Jer kako kaæe sveti Grigorije Palama. manastiri. jednu Crkvu. Tako su „struktura kanona i naåelo celokupne hriãñanske strukture (crkvene zajednice. koje 53 54 55 Loski. Tako apostoli åine jedno telo. U woj Boæanstvo obitava telesno kao ãto je obitavalo u oboæenom Hristovom åoveãtvu“53. Triipostasno i Svemoñno. ponosno prenoseñi poklowewe na prvolik“. . 2003: 119. „On silazi u svet i Crkvu (koja je iskupqena. ovo javqawe ne deãava se po suãtini veñ blagodati i sili i energiji koja je zajedniåka Ocu. „primamo sva crkvena predawa pisana i nepisana. Tako se otkriva i potvrœuje promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta. i pre svih najtajanstveniju i sveãtenu Sluæbu i Priåeãñe i Sabrawe (litugrijsko)“. 7. Sina Boæijeg. omivena i proåiãñena krvqu Hristovom)“ jer „Hristos uzlazi da bi siãao Duh Sveti“54. i po svemu onome sa åime Bog zajedniåari i po blagodati se sjediwuje sa svetim anœelima i qudima. Loski.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 63 Zakquåak Æivot Crkve je suãtinski povezan sa dogmom Trojedinog Boga.39) delovawe Svetog Duha je dobilo novu dimenziju u odnosu na prethodno delovawe kada je „govorio kroz proroke“. 2008: 208. Loski. Stoga se „poklawamo ikoni opisanoga.

boja. Tako se elementi kompozicije poistoveñuju sa reåima iz svetih spisa a gledawe ikone postaje åitawe koje vodi ka sozercawu Lika Gospodweg. 56 Sveti Grigorije Palama. perspektiva. svaki kompozicijski element ima svoj naroåit. Kompozicija. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. (1978: 473-477). eshatoloãki smisao. . Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere. Na ikoni. to jest prikazivawu viãeg.64 Teoloãki åasopis. boæanskog sveta vidqivim sredstvima komunikacije. N° 9 nikako ne gubi jedinstvenost i prostotu zbog sila i Ipostasi (svojih)“56.

Zoran 2005. Dimitrije 1963. Umetnost ikone: teologija lepote. Beograd: Jugoslovensko biblijsko druãtvo. Kurt 1976. . Beograd: Fakultet za kulturu i medije. Apokrifi novozavetni. Loski. Daniåiñ. Evdokimov. Srpska kwiæevna zadruga i Prosveta. Weitzmann.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 65 Bibliografija Bogdanoviñ. Beograd: Prosveta. Beograd: Åigoja. Beograd. Vizije u hriãñanstvu. Œuro 1998. Megatrend Univerziteta i Visoka ãkola – Akademija Srpske Pravoslavne Crkve za umetnost i konservaciju. Princeton: Princeton University. Jovanoviñ. Biblija ili Sveto Pismo Staroga i Novoga Zavjeta. Ernst 2006. Jovanoviñ. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. Vladimir 2003. Benc. Tomislav 2005. Stare srpske biografije. Azbuånik pravoslavne ikonografije i graditeqstva. Ogled o mistiåkom bogoslovqu Istoåne Crkve. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Pavle 2009. Beograd: Muzej SPC.

66

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Mediñ, Milorad 2002. Stari slikarski priruånici. Beograd: Republiåki zavod za zaãtitu spomenika kulture i Druãtvo prijateqa Svete Gore Atonske. Naniñ, Mirko 2005. Tropari i kondaci za sve dane u godini. Ãid: Srpska pravoslavna zajednica Ãid. Ozoqin, Nikolaj 2007. Pravoslavna ikona Pedesetnice: poreklo i razvoj wenih konstitutivnih tema u Bizantijskoj epohi. Begrad-Ãibenik: Istina, izdavaåka ustanova Eparhije dalmatinske. Ocokoqiñ, Jugoslav 2004. Ikona: åitawe, pisawe i sozercawe sa teologijom ikone. Beograd: Jugoslav Ocokoqiñ. Palama, Grigorije 1978. „Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere“. prev. Atanasije Jevtiñ. Beograd: Teoloãki pogledi 4. Skalova, Zuzana, Gawdat Gabra 2006. Icons of the Nile Waley. Egypt: Egyptian International Pub lishing Company – Longman. Templ, Riåard 2009. Ikone i tajnoviti izvori hriãñanstva. Kragujevac: Kaleniñ. Tomadakis, Nikolaos B., Konstantinos A. Manafis, Grossmann Peter, at al. 1990. Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery. ed. Manafis A. Konstantinos. Athens: George A. Christopoulos, John. C. Bastias.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

67

Uspenski, Leonid 2000. Teologija ikone. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Uspenski, Leonid, Vladimir Loski 2008. Smisao ikone. Jasen: Nikãiñ.

68

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Symbolism of the Feast of Pentecost: Written and Painted Sources
Resume This paper will discuss the symbolism of the Christian feast of Pentecost, through the written and painted sources. On the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descends on the apostles and restores the unity of God and people through the spiritual building of the Church. Also, this holiday is especially important because the Holy Spirit descends on each member of the Church and to everyone gives special gifts. The event in which the apostles speak different languages and understand each other is especially important. The particular gift, that occurs through the descend of the Holy Spirit is described in the feast’s icons of Pentecost. In accordance with fact that the picture through the history of Christianity had halting, but a very important role, in transmission of Tradition, emphasis of this work is on research of symbolism of single art elements (color, geometry, perspective), their origin and their role in transmitting of the invisible world by material means on the icon of Pentecost. Keywords: the Pentecost, icons, symbolism, the Holy Spirit.

69 Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu nikola.knezevic@nsts-online.org UDK 233.14 Primljeno: 01.04.2010 Prihvañeno: 05.04.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

KOMPARATIVNI PRISTUP: PECCATUM ORIGINALE
Rezime Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju poimanja termina prvorodnog greha (lat. peccatum originale) pre svega, u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije (lat. Imago Dei) u åoveku, odnosno, u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada, ili, taånije, u odnosu na ono ãto je od od te slike ostalo. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj, Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. Rimokatoliåka tradicija insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena, da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena, ali da nije i izgubljena. Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj, rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju poimanja ljudske prirode, åijoj razlici doprinosi i uvoœenje pojma donum superadditum. Nasuprot tome, u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koja podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu. Kljuåne reåi: praroditeljski greh, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

non posse mori posse non mori Isto. Stalna komunikacija sa Bogom bi omoguñila stvarnu besmrtnost . 6 . bezgreãnosti. nego su prestupivãi zapovest Boæiju. telo bilo besmrtno. prema tome.6 Naãi praroditelji nisu ostali u stanju prvobitne pravednosti. Åovekov zadatak nam je nagoveãten u åinjenici da je stvoren po obliåju Boæijem . bez moguñnosti da umre 4 veñ da je imalo moguñnost da ne umre 5 .1 Stvoren radi visokog i uzviãenog cilja. åovekovog odnosa sa Bogom i åovekovog odnosa sa beslovesnom prirodom. buduñi neokrnjene grehom. åovekovo savrãenstvo je bilo relativno. tamu i smrt. Netruleænost i besmrtnost telesna ne znaåi nuæno da je.åovek nije sagreãio.dar Boæije blagodati. åovek je postavljen iznad prirode i predodreœen je da bude posrednik izmeœu Tvorca i beslovesnih biña. nameñe ideju da su njegove duhovne sile. N° 9 Posedovanjem lika Boæijeg. Isto. i pali u greh. i telesno savrãenstvo prvozdanog åoveka jeste bilo samo relativno. zaslaœena prividnom naivnoãñu. åovek je izaãao iz ruke Boæije neporoåan. Tudoran. prvobitno stanje je obeleæeno savrãenim skladom samoga åoveka.3 Ipak. 2003: 2. bestrasan.2 Imajuñi u vidu svojstva kojima je åovek bio obdaren. Pad bi bio neobjaãnjiv da smo zadræali to stanje moralnog savrãenstva. po prirodi. njegov odnos sa Bogom i uslove u kojima je æiveo. Ova obmana je izvedena spretno. Sablaænjivi zmijin predlog izaziva u Evinoj duãi oseñaj gordosti koji brzo prerasta u bogoboraåko raspoloæenje kojem se Eva radoznalo podaje i 1 2 3 4 5 6 Vidi: Popoviñ: 1980: 260. bezazlen. 5.da bi vladao zemljom i svim ãto je na zemlji. bezgreãan. bile odreœene za slobodno razvijanje u smeru savrãenstva. svetlosti æivota. otpali od Boga. åovek je od Boga primio fiziåku i duhovnu snagu neophodnu za njegovo ostvarenje. Stvoren po liku Boæijem. Takoœe. svetosti i blaæenstva.70 Teoloãki åasopis.

ili. u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije u åoveku. Æena navodi muæa da je u tome sledi i on dobrovoljno jede zabranjeni rod. rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju ljudske prirode. Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. Kao ãto je zavist œavola prema Bogu bila uzrok njegovom padu na nebu. 1998: 138. da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena. tako je zavist njegova prema åoveku. kao bogolikom sazdanju Boæijem. Prvorodni greh nije u potpunosti uniãtio slobodu åoveka te u njemu i dalje postoji odreœeno dobro kao i sposobnost upravljanja prema dobrom.11 7 8 9 10 11 Vidi: Popoviñ. taånije. Vidi: Isto.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 71 svesno krãi Boæiju zapovest. Prvobitna pravednost nije bila organski.“9 Katoliåka crkva insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena. Obraz Boæiji u åoveku nije u potpunosti izgubljen. veñ „zatamnjen. . Prvorodni greh je oduzeo Adamu prvobitnu pravednost (lat. 14. Vidi: Franc Courth. bila povod pogubnog pada prvih ljudi. justitia originalis). odnosno. u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada. Vidi: Justin Popoviñ. Vidi: Tudoran. veñ spoljaãni dar blagodati. u odnosu na ono ãto je od nje ostalo. 273. odnosno sastavni deo åovekove duhovne i moralne prirode. jer prirodna teænja razuma i volje prema istini i dobru nije u potpunosti iãåezla.10 Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj.7 Ovom svetopisamskom istinom o poreklu i uzroku greha i zla u svetu proæeta je sræ Svetog predanja. 272. ali da nije i izgubljena. donum superadditum). Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. 302. ali nije naudio njegovoj prirodi.8 Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju åovekovog pada. poseban dodatak åovekovim prirodnim silama (lat. pre svega.

“15 Reformisano veroispovedanje iz 17. sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina kaæe „da je åoveku bez Boæije pomoñi nemoguñe åak i poåeti svoj put ka Bogu. nemoguñe da se okrene Bogu svojom voljom. ãiri se. 138. Vidi: Bloesch. Veñ se na poåetku starozavetne poruke nazire dinamika razvoja „grehovne sile“ koja pri padu prvosazdanih ljudi dobija svoj zamajac. Kanoni sa sinode u Dortrehtu 1618-1619: 2007: 51. ali nije nestala. nije sigurno da se ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga. N° 9 Nasuprot tome.. pogreãno je reñi da je iz åoveka u potpunosti iãåezla prirodna dobrota ili sloboda. ali nije uniãtena.17 Svetopisamsko poimanje praroditeljskog greha U Starom zavetu ne postoji eksplicitno definisan praroditeljski greh. 1989: 90. meœutim.. F. Vidi: Bloesch. Imago Dei je potamnela. veka. tvrdi sledeñe: „U åoveku je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo koje u njemu åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima.72 Teoloãki åasopis. sa viãe optimizma. Vidi: Franc Courth. Bente: 1921: XVIII poglavlje. kasniji uticaj greha na celo stvorenje. 1948: 644. slava Boæija je okrnjena. . 1989: 90.“16 Ipak.14 Augzburãko veroispovedanje. odnosno. niti je njime moguñe obratiti mu se.13 Luter je smatrao da je åoveku. iako tekst implicira njegovu pojavu i posledice. i poprima sve veñe dimenzije ostavljajuñi posledice zbog kojih trpi sav ljudski rod. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Vidi: Augustine. poãto je greh zaposeo sve pore njegovog biña. u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koje prvobitno potiåe od blaæenog Avgustina12 i podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu.

i da su sve misli srca njihovog svagda samo zle. Vidi: Nemet. Savremena egzegeza ovakvo tumaåenje smatra spornim zbog nedostatka konteksta. bez izuzetaka. Rim 3. druãtvene posledice greha i liånu odgovornost poåinioca – svaki greh je greh protiv Saveza i liåni greh protiv Boga. 1 Moj 6. peccatum originale originatum). 46.“22 Apostol Pavle se ovde bavi Adamom jer mu on otvara moguñnost da govori o uticaju Hrista koji je sveopãti.21 Pojam praroditeljskog greha je neãto odreœeniji u Novom zavetu. Stihovima iz 1Moj 3 se dokazivao „uzroåni greh“ kojim je greh uãao u svet (lat. pokaja se Gospod ãto je stvorio åoveka na zemlji.23 Misao o univerzalnosti istorije spasenja u Hristu i o nesretnom dogaœaju sa Adamom izrazio je idejom korporativne specifiånosti. 5-6. Adam predstavlja jedinstvo ljudskog roda. Ps 13. i bi mu æao u srcu.20 Tridentski sabor je tekstovima iz 1Moj 3 i Ps 51. sagreãili (1Moj 6. 31. Uporedi: Rim 5. 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 Moj 1. Jer 13. 5 i 8.“ 19 Postoje mnoga mesta u Starom zavetu koja direktno svedoåe o tome da su svi ljudi. .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 73 Uporedimo reåi Stvoritelja na vrhuncu ãestodneva: „Tada pogleda Bog sve ãto je stvorio. kao i greh. 23). dok se stihom iz Psalma dokazivalo greãno stanje sveta i åoveka (lat. 167. U proroåkoj i mudrosnoj literaturi Starog zaveta se postepeno razvija individualistiåko shvatanje greha i njegovih posledica. 2003: 166. a Adamova greãka ukazuje na to da kada je greh u pitanju. dobro beãe veoma. meœu ljudima nema razlike: „Kao ãto je napisano: Nema ni jednog pravednog. Vidi: Isto.“ 18 sa kasnijom konstatacijom: „I Gospod videñi da je nevaljalstvo ljudsko veliko na zemlji. peccatum originale originans). 2-3. i gle. 9-10. 1Car 8. Starozavetna poruka jasno naglaãava dvojnost greha. 15. Po apostolu Pavlu. odnosno. 21. 5 (7) definisao dogmu o praroditeljskom grehu.

bol. on joã uvek nije bio moralno dovrãena liånost.“25 Stvorio ga je Bog. ali sa moguñnoãñu da sagreãi. patnje. Adam nije imao apsolutno spoznajno i moralno savrãenstvo.24 Istoåna tradicija Pravoslavno uåenje stanje prvosazdanog åoveka objaãnjava na ovaj naåin: „Stanje nevinosti ili odsustva greha … nepoznavanje greha ili nedostatak æelje za ogrehovljenjem… Pre no ãto je sagreãio Adam je bio u stanju harmonije. åovek je stvoren kao slovesno. Naæalost. Grigorije Niski. svojom 24 25 26 27 Vidi: Courth. kako uma. a samim tim slobodnim kada je u pitanju volja. . N° 9 Adam je predak apostola naroda i tip greãnog åoveåanstva. Grigorije Niski. Prevashodno. Vidi: Isto. „izumitelja zla“ kako ga joã naziva Sv.26 Takvo stanje savrãentsva podrazumeva i åinjenicu da je åovek sazdan kao biñe kojem su bile strane bolesti. kao biñe koje je posedovalo slobodnu volju. kao ãto je Hrist predvodnik izbavljenih.27 Na kraju. Zavist jednog od nekada najveñih meœu heruvimima. 6. Sv. ujedinjenog savrãenstva i pravde. kada najviãem åinu svoga stvaranja daje moguñnost da se okrene od njega. 4. slobodna volja ljudskog biña postaje oruœe njegovog ropstva. slobodno biñe sa moguñnoãñu da odluåuje. tako i volje. U ovome se najbolje oåitava veliåina Boæije intervencije i veliåina Stvoritelja samog.74 Teoloãki åasopis. bez sklonosti ka grehu. koje su postale delom åovekove prirode nakon njegovog pada u greh i koje su posledica ogrehovljenja same åovekove prirode. 1998:108. 2001: 208 (poglavlje 26). Njegov um je posedovao brojna znanja. dakle. Prvi åovek je bio savrãen u tom smislu ãto je i njegovo duhovno i fiziåko bilo na najviãem stepenu i omoguñavalo mu je da ispuni svoj zadatak. njegova volja savrãenu pravednost i dobrotu. Vidi: Tudoran.

mnogo viãe im je naãkodila njihova vlastita æelja nego nagovor zmije. Najzad. Naslednost prvorodnog greha sveopãta je."28 Tako nastaje prvi greh. 28 29 30 31 Serafim Rouz. da prvosazdani ljudi snose krivicu za grehopad.30 Na ceo ljudski rod kao deo izmenjene åovekove prirode prenose se i sve posledice pada: unakaæenost lica Boæijeg. Vidi: Popoviñ. samim tim i greh sa svim svojim posledicama i kaznama . 290. osiromaãenja i smrtnosti. 295.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 75 ruãilaåkom tendencijom uspeva da zavede ljudsko biñe i tako dovede do promene njegove same prirode . 287. bolesti. on ne podrazumeva apriori i „nasleœenu krivicu“. Vidi: Isto. Jasno je.njenog ograniåenja. Buduñi da je Adam bio otac celog åoveåanstva. jer niko od ljudi nije izuzet od toga osim Bogoåoveka. Sveti Jefrem Sirijski kaæe da je Adam u sebi posedovao potencijal za ovakav ishod: „Reå iskuãenja ne bi odvela u greh one ãto su iskuãavani da kuãaåa nije rukovodila njihova sopstvena æelja. Ovakav prestup Boæije zapovesti poslediåno postaje grehom celog ljudskog roda. greh koji je uåinio otac ljudskog roda. veñ podrazumeva osobinu svakog pojedinca da se lakãe upravlja prema zlu nego prema dobru. potiåuñi od Adama. stradanja i smrt. projavljuje se u svima bez izuzetka kao neko æivo greãno naåelo. . oskrnavljenost srca. pomraåenje razuma. Gospoda Isusa Hrista. ali se ta krivica ne prenosi na potomke. Vidi: Isto. kao kategorija i zakon greha koji æivi u åoveku i dejstvuje u njemu i kroz njega. preneo je svoju palu prirodu na svoje potomstvo. Åovekov Pad: 3. drvo bi svojom lepotom uvelo njihova srca u rat. to jest.otuda i naziv prvorodni ili praroditeljski greh. dakle. iskvarenost volje.29 Greãnost ljudske prirode. œavolje iskuãenje je uspelo zbog toga ãto je on znao (ili je pretpostavljao) ãta se nalazi u srcu samoga åoveka.31 Vaæno je reñi da u pravoslavnoj antropologiji nasledni greh nema Avgustinske implikacije. Iako su praroditelji traæili opravdanje za sebe u nagovoru zmije. Åak i da kuãaå nije doãao.

1980: 282.“34 Posledice pada ljudskog roda bile su fiziåkog i moralnog karaktera. i do oblaåenja u smrtnost. Grigorije Niski. U fiziåkom smislu.“ 37 32 33 34 35 36 37 Ware. Vidi: Ware. Romanidis. N° 9 Prestupanjem zapovesti prvosazdani ljudi podlegli su Sataninoj obmani i promaãili svoje prvobitno naznaåenje.76 Teoloãki åasopis. veliko i dragoceno stvorenje. Grigorije Niski. 35 Kako je to svojevremeno govorio Sv. sliåno onima koji su iz nesmotrenosti upali u blato i ukaljali lice svoje. Umesto da igra ulogu posrednika i ujedinitelja. veñ teæi da je zavede. Liãen zajednice sa Bogom. Vidi: Sv. „pad nije ograniåen samo na ljudski rod. te ih åak ni poznanici ne mogu raspoznati. starosti i na kraju smrti.36 „Tako je åovek. U moralnom smislu. priroda viãe ne sluæi åoveku. otuœen tako od samoga sebe i oslabljene volje. postao je neprijatelj samome sebi. podelu unutar samoga sebe i drugih ljudi. liãio sebe svog dostojanstva upavãi u blato greha.32 Umesto do savrãentstva i oboæenja. kod ljudskog biña je doãlo do izopaåenja i gubitka dostojanstva koje je bilo ravno anœeoskom. izgubio je lik netruleænog Boga i kroz greh se obukao u lik truleæi i praãine. podelu izmeœu sebe i prirodnog sveta. Åovek je postao predmet unutraãnjeg otuœenja. . Vidi: Tudoran. 1979: 59. 1979: 60. krenuli su putem otuœenosti od Boga i sopstvene prirode. åini to sa naporom. taãtina i depresija su postale svakodnevnica ljudskog roda. on je prouzrokovao podelu. 8. veñ se prostire i na beslovesne æivotinje i na beslovesnu prirodu. tvrdi pravoslavni bogoslov Kalistos Ver. ljudska biña su postala podloæna bolesti.33 Pad ljudskog biña ontoloãki menja celokupno stvorenje. Greh naruãava harmoniju åoveka sa samim sobom. a kada mu sluæi. 2001: 121. åovek postaje rob greha. frustracije. bolu. (17:2) Popoviñ. sa Bogom i sa prirodom: telo se viãe ne pokorava duãi. 2001: 40.

. o duhovnoj smrti kada kaæe za prvosazdane ljude da su „u trenutku kad su åuli reåi: prah si i u prah ñeã se vratiti. delimiåno slobodna. åoveåanstvo po svaku cenu mora biti krivac za pad. Popoviñ. pomraåen i unakaæen. primili smrtnu presudu. Romanidis kaæe sledeñe: „Ako se jednom prihvati da propadljivost i smrt predstavljaju kaznu od Boga za sve ljude. lik Boæiji u åoveku nije uniãten. ipak. postali smrtni i moæemo reñi. natprirodnog i inputiranog dara koji na taj naåin i nije åinio deo ogranske prirode åoveka.“39 Ono ãto pravoslavnu antropologiju åini autentiånom i najoptimistiånijom jeste upravo njeno poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku nakon grehopada. 1980: 282. odnosno. vrlo je vaæno reñi da nije Bog tvorac smrti veñ œavo. Romanidis. i manje optimistiånih tumaåenja protestanskog stanoviãta „potpune iskvarenosti“. ali. Åovekov Pad: 8. to je protivno ljudskoj prirodi kojoj je mnogo lakãe da se rukovodi upravo suprotnim. Da bi se.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 77 Poãto se priroda ljudskog biña ontoloãki promenila. 2001: 234. kako je to rekao ava Justin: „duboko povreœen. Sveti Jovan Zlatousti govori. pre svega. kada je u pitanju pravoslavna antropologija.“38 Posledica toga je i fiziåka smrt. tada se stvara bezizlaz u vezi sa prenoãenjem smrti i propadljivosti na potomke Adamove. zbog boæanske ljubavi prema åoveku. pod tim predpostavkama. Åovekova volja ostaje samo uslovno. U odnosu na poreklo smrti. u pravoslavnoj antropologiji. saåuvala dobrota Boæija.“40 Ljudsko biñe je i dalje sposobno da se opredeljuje prema dobru. veñ. umrli. Bog je dopustio smrt ne zbog nekakvog kaænjeniåkog raspoloæenja boæanske pravednosti. zaklju38 39 40 Serafim Rouz. Naglaãavajuñi ovo. veñ naprotiv. i ljudski rod je doæiveo fiziåku smrt. posle pada. Na osnovu ljudske istorije. Za razliku od rimokatoliåke antropologije koja unakaæenje lika vidi kao gubitak åovekove „prvobitne pravednosti“.

ukljuåujuñi i slobodu izbora koju on ima.42 Zapadna tradicija U prethodnim poglavljima je veñ bilo reåi o rimokatoliåkom. åovek je joã uvek sposoban za poærtvovanje i samilost. 62. Boæanski lik u åoveku. te mu je. 19 . åime se podrazumeva da on i dalje poseduje odreœeno bogopoznanje. 41 42 Rim 1. na prvi pogled. N° 9 åujemo da je åoveku data moguñnost bogopoznanja kako o tome svedoåi i Sv. Protestanska antropologija je sliåna pravoslavnoj u odnosu na prirodu åoveka. meœutim. povratak na poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku je neizbeæan i prvenstveno. omoguñeno da stupi u zajedniãtvo sa Bogom. 41 Sumirajuñi stanoviãte pravoslavne tradicije po ovom pitanju. Kalistos Ver kaæe da ona (pravoslavna tradicija) bez umanivanja samih posledica pada ne smatra da je pad rezultirao „totalnom iskvarenoãñu”. prema tome. Sagledañemo poimanje pada ljudskog biña u greh i njegove posledice sa stanoviãta rimokatoliåke i protestanske antropologije. odnosno. po milosti Boæijoj. Vidi: Ware. na razliåite naåine gledaju na prirodu ljudskog biña. ostao je zamuñen ali ne i uniãten.78 Teoloãki åasopis. kako to tvrde neka pesimistiånija kalvinistiåka stanoviãta.20. Kada se razmatra problematika pada ljudskog biña. Åak i u palom svetu. protestantskom pogledu na imago Dei. nailazimo na manje ili viãe opreåna stanoviãta. Razmatrajuñi åovekov pad i posledice pada iz perspektive zapadne hriãñanske tradicije i poredeñi ga sa stanoviãtem pravoslavne antropologije. ali u manjoj meri. Pravoslavna i rimokatoliåka antropologija se podudaraju u tvrdnji da je lik Boæiji u åoveku posle grehopada osiromaãen. Apostol Pavle. neophodan. . a razlikuje se od nje u odnosu na posledice pada i dalje soterioloãke implikacije.

jer iako moralno nevina.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 79 Crkvena tradicija Joã krajem drugog veka.45 Avgustin produbljuje teoloãki smisao pokvarenosti åoveka. prema Avgustinu je u poremeñenom odnosu prema Bogu. Meliton Sardski govori o grehu koji je ljudski rod nasledio od Adama. Greh je ono ãto se moæe izbeñi. kako jedni smatraju. s obzirom da greh zavisi iskljuåivo od slobodne volje. Ãtaviãe. 108. u 43 44 45 Vidi: Isto. prema tome. O ovome vidi viãe u Justin: 1980: 301-307. Vidi: Justin. 2003: 174. Irinej Lionski i Tertulian: polazili su od istine da je otkupljenje potrebno svima. shvatanje spasenja i praksa krãtenja su bili uobiåajeno povezani s priznavanjem odreœenog greãnog stanja u kojem se åovek nalazi. jer ako je Hrist umro za sve. do suprotne krajnosti. åovek moæe biti bez greha. Meliton pod nasledstvom podrazumeva nesretno stanje åoveka koje ga podjarmljuje i zavodi na greh. Po Pelagiju. dovodeñi ga.43 Veñ u prvim vekovima. 1980: 300. 110. te. Vidi: Courth.44 U jeku rasprave blaæenog Avgustina sa Pelagijem. do taåke kristalizacije.47 Avgustin polazi od razmiãljanja o crkvenoj praksi krãtenja dece koja podrazumeva da su deca greãnici. Nemet. to jest. Ovom temom su se bavili joã i Sv. po uåenju Pelagija. Pelagije je engleski monah iz åetvrtog veka åije je uåenje proglaãeno jeretiåkim. greh nije neãto supstancijalno i ne pripada prirodi åoveka. Bit praroditeljskog greha. bez uticaja Boæanskog. boreñi se protiv markionizma i gnosticizma. onda su svi greãni i svi imaju potrebu za otkupljenjem i spasenjem. åovek je i dalje u moguñnosti da bira izmeœu dobra i zla. imaju nasledni greh od kojeg se oslobaœaju krãtenjem.46 a kako drugi smatraju. Vidi: Nemet: 2003: 173. do potpune pokvarenosti åoveka. Razvio je teoriju o poreklu i naslednosti greha. 46 47 . greh je potpuno sluåajna trenutna pojava koja niåe jedino u oblasti slobodne volje i to poãto se u njoj razvije sloboda koja ga jedina moæe proizvesti.

52 Nesumnjivo je da je na oba sabora Avgustinovo shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. zbog Adamove neposluãnosti. 114. Vidi: Courth. govori o poæudi koja se smatra nasledstvom od prvosazdanog åoveka i samim tim i izvorom liånih greha. povezano s duãevnom smrñu.49 Avgustinova nauka o praroditeljskom grehu suãtinski se svodi na åinjenicu da åovek „dolazi na svet obeleæen. Na crkvenom saboru je bilo prihvañeno nekoliko kanona i odluka koje su se odnosile na pojam i shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. Prades. i za koju ga. N° 9 oholosti i samoljublju. Vidi: Isto. Marengo. . premda ga ona uslovljava. 116. Isto. kako „razjedninjenje åoveka. 1998: 111. ne moæemo pozvati na odgovornost. ne samo nekom opãtom pokvarenoãñu koja mu prethodi. godine na koji ñe se skoro hiljadu godina kasnije pozivati na Tridentskom saboru.80 Teoloãki åasopis. Sabor je pre svega posmatrao odnos ranjene prirode ljudskog biña i milosti spasenja. godine u Kartagini. praroditeljski greh podrazumeva. imalo presudan znaåaj i veliki uticaj.“ 50 Kao takav. nametnuo svim ljudima.48 Hiponski biskup. Sabor na kojem se dalje razvijalo stanoviãte zapadne crkve o praroditeljskom grehu bio je sabor u Oranæu 529. na osnovu uverenja o greãnom stanju u kojem se nalazi svaki Adamov potomak. 2003: 206. Vidi: Scola. koje je na ovim saborima i zvaniåno prihvañeno.51 Sabori u Kartagini i Oranæu Teoloãka rasprava sa Pelagijem i njegovim uåenjem dovela je do sazivanja crkvenog sabora afriåkih crkava 418. veñ i realno greãnim biñem koje u njemu postoji i kojim se unapred odreœuje za veånu osudu. 207.“ tako i kaznu koju je Stvoritelj. 48 49 50 51 52 Vidi: Courth.

sledeñi Anselma iz Aoste i koristeñi se skolastiåkom terminologijom. 120. kao materijalni element. 53 Toma Akvinski U 13. Vidi: Fairweather. prepoznaje u prisutnosti poæude.Akvinski razum i intelekt smatra duãevnim elementima koji su usmereni prema dobru dok je „niæi“ deo duãe usmeren ka zlu. Marengo. veku jedan on najveñih teologa katoliåke crkve. 124. sve ljude stavlja u poloæaj neprijateljstva prema Bogu. Vidi: Isto. Gubitak prvobitne milosti predstavlja formalnu prirodu praroditeljskog greha. Vidi: Isto. Vidi. Prades. predstavlja gubitak sklada duãevnih elemenata . 121. Svaka poæuda.56 Formalna priroda praroditeljskog greha je odreœena njegovim uzrokom koji je suprotan prvobitnoj milosti koja se sastoji iz posluãnosti ljudskog biña Boæijoj volji.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 81 Nakon sabora u Oranæu vekovima nije postojalo veñe interesovanje za problematiku praroditeljskog greha ali je izvesno interesovanje u srednjem veku formiralo stav da se prisutnost sluåajne pokvarenosti ljudske naravi. 208. kako ga joã Akvinski naziva. definisao je praroditeljski greh kao sintezu dva elementa: potpunog gubitka54 izvorne ili prvobitne pravednosti55 kao formalnoga elementa i poæude kao materijalnog elementa. poãto je Adam uzor åovekovog morala i predstavnika celog åoveåantsva. Praroditeljski greh predstavlja. 1954: 124. koja. Toma Akvinski ulogu prvobitne milosti vidi kao ravnoteæu 53 54 55 56 57 Vidi: Scola. na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha se gleda i kao na moralnu solidarnost ljudskog roda sa Adamom. . Takoœe. Toma Akvinski. umrtvljenost ljudske prirode. poåevãi od Adama. Isto. 57 Vaæno je spomenuti i ulogu „prvobitne“ pravednosti u åoveku.

1989: 91. pioniri reformacije. Reformacija U 16. i na hamartiologiju Katoliåke crkve upãte. Isto: 96. Nije jasno da li je priroda åoveka. srcem. intelekt i niæi delovi duãe). kako bi onda priroda nakon grehopada mogla da ostane u neizmenjenom stanju? Da li to znaåi da se ljudsko biñe nakon grehopada vraña u svoje prirodno stanje. Treñi ålan treñeg poglavlja kanona sa sabora u Dortu glasi ovako: 58 59 60 61 62 Vidi: Isto. Vidi: Popoviñ. N° 9 izmeœu duãevnih elemenata (razum. stanje bez blagodati?59 Tomistiåko viœenje praroditeljskog greha je nesumljivo ostavilo traga na veliki Sabor koji ñe uslediti nekoliko vekova kasnije. Greh zahvata sve pore ljudskog biña i onemoguñava mu da se okrene Bogu sopstvenom voljom. zakljuåujemo da justitia originalis po Akvinskom nije bila organski deo ljudske prirode. 302. Luter i Kalvin gledali su na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha kao na silu koja je u potpunosti ovladala ljudskim biñem. nakon grehopada povreœena. Da li bi bilo potrebno stavljati elemente u ravnoteæu da „niæi“ deo duãe nije i pre Adamovog pada bio usmeren ka zlu? Da li je doctor Angelicus ukazao na manihejski dualizam ljudske prirode i pre njegovog pada.60 Luter je opisao åoveka zarobljenog grehom kao incurvatus-a (savijen prema sebi). Sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina. bez Boæije intervencije. ili je samo izmenjena njena moguñnost da se usmerava ka dobrom.58 Imajuñi ovo u vidu.62 Ljudsko biñe se raœa pokvareno. njegovim umom. 1957: 261.82 Teoloãki åasopis. odnosno. 126. i svim njegovim delima. Vidi: Bloesh. veku. . jer ako jeste. po Akvinskom. Vidi: Calvin. u jeku reformacije. problematika praroditeljskog greha dobija drugaåiji naglasak.61 a njegovu pokvarenost kao „duboku i zlu“.

veñ je u nemoguñnosti da usmerava åoveka da iãta uradi u pogledu svog spasenja bez uticaja Boæanske spasonosne milosti. kao izopaåenje ljudske prirode i kao samu suãtinu ljudskog greha. odnosno. nepoverenja. Barth.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet „Svi ljudi su zaåeti u grehu i raœaju se kao sinovi gneva. http://www.htm 66 67 68 Brunner.64 Reåi osmog poglavlja Drugog Helvetskog veropispovedanja imaju radikalniji prizvuk: „Puni zloñe (=ljudi). 2007: 50. 94. umrli u grehu i robovi greha. Concupiscense. nesposobni za svako spasonosno delo. civilis justitia).“65 Bruner smatra da je greh promenio i izopaåio celokupnu ljudsku prirodu. niti se mogu vratiti Bogu. nismo u moguñnosti sami od sebe da åinimo. 1959: 500. osude i mrænje prema Bogu. skloni zlu.com/chr/2helvcnf. moguñnost da i dalje razumom u svakodnevnom æivotu 63 64 Kanoni sa sinoda u Dordrechtu. veñ poniãtava njegovo pripisivanje åoveku. i volja ljudskog biña nije u potpunosti zarobljena. . veñ je samo potamnela. åak ni da mislimo ni o åemu dobrom.sa- 65 Drugo Helvetsko veroispovedanje. niti mogu ispraviti izopaåenu narav i tu doneti poboljãanje. cred-texts. Bez milosti Duha Svetoga koji preporaœa. Bloesh. ne æele. suprotno katoliåkom uåenju. a ne samo jedan njen deo66 . 1953. Åovek i dalje poseduje takozvanu graœansku pravednost (lat. dodavãi pritom. i time otklanja prokletstvo greha sa ljudskog biña. Karl Bart opisuje åoveka kao „korenito i potpuno pokvarenog“.67 a ipak smatra da slika Boæija nije nestala iz åoveka.“63 83 Luter je definisao znaåenje reåi concupiscentia neãto drugaåije.68 Takoœe.deo slike Boæije je ostao u ljudskoj prirodi. 137. Vidi: Catholic Encyclopedia. da krãtenje ne poniãtava krivicu praroditeljskog greha.

za delove mudrosti i istina koje su prisutne u nehriñanskim religijama. iako je moguñnost ove spoznaje svedena na minimum. a posebno Kalvinizma. ono åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. Van Baren. 69 Potpuna pokvarenost predstavlja rezultat pada ljudskog biña u greh. Ona podrazumeva da je svaki deo ljudskog biña oãteñen grehom. ålan Augzburãkog veroispovedanja. doprinose tome da ljudsko biñe. kao i imago Dei. Ovakvo tumaåenje radikalizuje pojam potpune pokvarenosti i ne predstavlja suãtinu poruke koju su Kalvin i kasnije sabor u Dortu ispovedali. N° 9 delimiåno razlikuje dobro i zlo. odnosno. Isto. 1976. Vidi: Bloesh: 90. Dakle. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. . ãto pruæa objaãnjenje za delimiåno Bogopoznanje. ali istovremeno naglaãava da ljudsko biñe nije pokvareno u celosti.84 Teoloãki åasopis. Herman. imago Dei u åoveku jeste oãteñena ali ona joã uvek postoji. kako o tome svedoåi 11. apsolutna pokvarenost implicira iskvarenost ljudskog biña u celini (u njemu ne ostaje ni trunke dobra) i nemoguñnost razlikovanja dobra od zla. po pitanju praroditeljskog greha se najåeãñe povezuje sa pojmom potpune pokvarenosti.“72 Opãta Boæija milost. te razlikuje izmeœu onoga ãto je åasno i neåasno.70 Nasuprot tome. 50. kao i za moralna naåela koja se 69 70 71 72 Hanko.71 U ljudskom biñu je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo: „Zahvaljujuñi tome. i pokazuje neko nastojanje oko kreposti i discipline. Ãta je taåno obuhvañeno ovim pojmom? Potrebno je pojaãnjenje ovog pojma da bismo izbegli njegovo radikalno razumevanje. Stanoviãte protestanske provenijencije. Opãta milost omoguñava odreœene spoznaje o Bogu. okrnjena je ali nije uniãtena. Suãtina razumevanja pojma je u razlikovanju potpunog od apsolutnog. joã uvek poseduje sposobnost za spoznaju pravednosti.

Ljudskom pravednoãñu se moæe steñi poãtovanje i divljenje ljudi. Åovek je i dalje odgovoran pred Bogom. Govoriti o apsolutnoj iskvarenosti kao opãtem stanoviãtu unutar protestantizma bilo bi suviãe jednostrano. ali nije uniãten. naruãen je. ona neprihvatljiva. Bloesh. jer celo njegovo biñe odraæava slavu njegovog Stvoritelja. i tako dok neãto åini..“76 73 74 75 76 Vidi: Bloesh: 91. pa samim tim. 50.. iz Boæijeg ugla.73 Ovo svetlo ipak nije dovoljno za dolaæenje do Bogopoznanja koje vodi ka spasenju: „Ali nije sigurno da se s ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga niti je moguñe njemu se obratiti. savremeni protestanski teolog. i zadræati ga u nepravdi. iako je njegova sloboda znaåajno oslabljena i oãteñena. jer se okrenuo od Boga da bi postigao vlastite ciljeve.75 Postoji izvesna polarizovanost stanoviãta protestantskih teologa po pitanju shvatanja ljudske prirode posle grehopada. sva njegova dobra dela zaraæena su greãnom motivacijom ili namisli. pokuãava na razliåite naåine ugasiti ovo svetlo. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. Donald Bloã. i naprotiv. Åitav åovek je biser. ipak. Bloesh. odraz Boæijeg biña u åoveku. odliåno je defisao sloæenu postavku kompleskne teoloãke postavke: „Imago Dei. biti bez isprike pred Bogom“74 Buduñi da je ljudsko biñe delimiåno u moguñnosti da åini dela pravednosti i da doœe do odreœenog stepena moralnih vrlina. ali ne i Boga.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 85 mogu videti u kulturama najstarijih civilizacija. 95. govorio je Luter. jer se åovek ne koristi ispravno prirodnim i graœanskim stvarima. åovek je æalosno okrnjen biser. . 91.

140. kanonu crkveni oci. kanonu se istiåe vaænost krãtenja dece. Apostola Pavla. naglaãavaju da se praroditeljski greh prenosi i odnosi na celo åoveåanstvo. Italija. Isto. kanonu se istiåe neutralan stav u odnosu na bezgreãno zaåeñe Majke Boæije. Luter je smatrao da krãtenje ne briãe u potpunosti praroditeljski greh. Vidi: Courth. veñ potomstvom i poreklom. godine. sledeñi Sv.79 U 2. juna 1546.82 Krãtenje. . Vidi: Nemet.80 U 3. 141.78 U 1. U 4. 21. vraña åoveka u odnos prijateljstva sa Bogom. Ni na jednom drugom saboru do tada nije bilo potrebe za odluåivanjem o tako vaænim pitanjima pod tako teãkim okolnostima. izmeœu 1545-1563. Na saboru je 17. Vidi: Courth. 184. 2003: 180. sredinom 16. veka.86 Teoloãki åasopis. kanonu se razmatra Luterovo poimanje krãtenja 81 i nasuprot Luteru. Nemet. N° 9 Tridentski Sabor Kao odgovor na teoloãke i eklesioloãke izazove Reformacije. kanonu dekreta sabor se odreœuje prema tradiciji anselmovsko – tomistiåkog poimanja praroditeljskog greha kao gubitka iskonske svetosti i pravednosti. kanonu ispoveda se da se praroditeljski greh ne prenosi oponaãanjem. 21. nego da je za to potrebna i vera pojedinca. Tridentski sabor je naglasio naåelnu neophodnost spasenja svih ljudi 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 Danaãnji Trento. godine proglaãeno 6 kanona o praroditeljskom grehu. sabor naglaãava kako ova sveta tajna u potpunosti i u njegovoj biti briãe praroditeljski greh. U 5.83 U 6. J. Waterworth: 1848. prema tome. odræan je Tridentski77 sabor.84 Tridentski sabor je bio od velikog znaåaja za poimanje praroditeljskog greha i za razvoj æivota unutar Katoliåke crkve dobar deo Sabora je bio posveñen raspravama o crkvenim tajnama.

Vidi: Nemet. godine. i da se taj greh preneo na celo njegovo potomstvo. donekle je smanjio teoloãke tenzije izmeœu Katoliåke crkve i Protestantizma. papa Pije XII u svojoj enciklici pod nazivom „Humani generis“.86 Joã 1950. nauånog objaãnjenja porekla æivota na zemlji i stvaranja sveta uopãte. u 36. Takoœe. Vidi: Humani Generis. . ponovo se budi interesovanje za pojmom praroditeljskog greha.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 87 i znaåaj krãtenja kao svete tajne koja briãe praroditeljski greh (sa ostatkom poæude kao posledice praroditeljskog greha). i poåetkom 20. naizgled suprostavljene strane. ålanu je potvrœen monogenizam i åinjenica da Adam nije metaforiåki prikaz viãe parova i snaæno je naglaãena åinjenica da je greh poåinio pojedinac. ali da je za stvaranje åovekove duãe zasluæan samo Bog. Vidi: Isto. ålan 36. 2003.85 Savremena shvatanja praroditeljskog greha Krajem 19. poziva bogoslove da pokuãaju da pomire nauåno i versko shvatanje porekla æivota. novih filosofskih tendencija i poimanja sveta. ålanu enciklike istiåe da je moguñe da ljudsko telo ima svoj evolutivni poredak. U ovakvom druãtvenom stanju svesti mnogi bogoslovi su traæili put ka sintezi verskih istina i dostignuña savremene nauke. kao i zbog mnogih arheoloãkih otkriña. 143. Spremao se novi izazov za teologiju: na koji naåin odgovoriti na savremena nauåna pitanja i da li je moguñe pomiriti ove dve. razvoja prirodnih nauka. ålan 37.87 U 37. odnosno Adam. zbog novih erminevtiåkih pristupa. 185. veka.88 85 86 87 88 Vidi: Isto. primera radi. Tako se.

da bude pred Bogom.91 Veliki znaåaj pojmu praroditeljskog greha nesumnjivo daje i Katehizam Katoliåke Crkve. Vidi: Isto. Isto. ålan 13. Formulacija Sabora o praroditeljskom grehu je kratka i jasna i joã jednom naglaãava podeljenost åovekove prirode. 90 91 92 93 94 95 Gaudium et Spes. Vidi: Cathehism of Catholic Church.88 Teoloãki åasopis. 1993: ålan 397. .92 Åovek je pao u okrilje greha voœen æeljom „da bude kao Bog. ali ne i u saglasnosti sa njim. vaæan dokument sa kraja proãlog veka koji je okupio najvaænije bogoslove Katoliåke crkve. velikog bogoslova Katoliåke crkve iz proãloga veka. ålan 400.“93 Posledice pada su gubitak prvobitne pravednosti i iskvarenost slike Boæije u åoveku. ålan 399. Katehizam definiãe sadræaj praroditeljskog greha kao gubitak poverenja u Stvoritelja. N° 9 Drugi vatikanski sabor89 se nije posebno osvrtao na pitanje praroditeljskog greha. zloupotrebu date slobode i neposluãnost prema Boæijoj zapovesti. jer ona predstavlja delo liåne slobode pojedinca (=Adama) u kojoj je osoba jedinstvena i niko ne moæe da zauzme njeno mesto.94 Posledice pada i iskvarenosti ljudske prirode prenose se na celokupno stvorenje95 kao i na sve 89 Odræan izmeœu 1962 . Rahner. otvorio ga je Papa Jovan XXIII. joã jednom naglaãava nemoguñnost åoveka da se bori protiv zla u sebi bez Boæije pomoñi. godine. veñ je njegovu formulaciju ostavio u okvirima koji su utvœeni na Tridentskom saboru. biña u kome se vodi „dramatiåna borba izmeœu dobra i zla. zatvorio Papa Pavle VI.“90 Takoœe. ålan 398. pa se ni liåna Adamova krivica ne moæe na nas preneti. izmeœu svetlosti i tame.1965. 1982: 111. ali bez Boga. koji je joã jednom naglasio vaænost åinjenice da Adamov greh ne moæe biti inputiran u nas. Vaæno je spomenuti i miãljenje Karla Ranera. Vidi: Isto.

http://www. prihvatajuñi stanoviãta opreåna crkvenom uåenju kao opãte prihvañene normative. u buduñnosti.99 Izazovi u vidu najnovijih nauånih dostignuña i savremene kulture koja teæi ka tome da trivijalizuje i relazivizuje pojam greha uopãte. 2003: 189. Latinska reå concupiscentia oznaåa unutraãnju teænju i sklonost ljudskog biña da åini greh. kao i njihov zajedniåki dijalog sa protestanskim denominacijama. 98 99 . odgovora na izazove koje pruæa postmodernistiåko druãtvo. iako je oãteñena. Pribliæavanje bogoslovskih stavova Pravoslavne i Rimokatoliåke crkve. kao i generalizovanju jednog svehriãñanskog stanoviãta. odnosno. Catholic Encyclopedia. ljudska priroda nije u potpunosti iskvarena. ranjena i teæi97 ka grehu.org/cathen/04208a. Nemet. greh je nasleœen ali ne i poåinjen. ålan 405. stavljaju danaãnje bogoslove pred novi i nimalo lak zadatak. moæe. 96 97 Vidi: Isto.newadvent. on ne nosi i liånu krivicu za Adamov greh. izazovi egzistencijalistiåkih.98 Drugim reåima. da doprinese i novim pogledima na shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. Niske pobude suprotne razumu.htm Vidi: Isto.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 89 Adamove potomke. ålan 402. Vidi o tome viãe: Concupiscense.96 Iako se greh prenosi na sve potomke. Nema sumnje da savremena sekularizacija druãtva i devijacija moralno – kulturnih normi i obrazaca. nihilistiåkih i naturalistiåkih svetonazora zahtevaju ozbiljan pristup i odgovor od strane hriãñanskih provenijencija.

Grigorije Niski. Donald 1989. The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption. Nature and grace: Selections from the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas Philadephia. Beograd: Biblioteka Obraz Svetaåki. Barth. G. G. Œakovo: Forum bogoslova. The Humanity of God Richmond. Calvin. M 1954. The Institutes of the Christian Religion. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. The Westiminster Press. Lutheran Church St. John 1957. Brunner.90 Teoloãki åasopis.VA: John Knox Press. H. Courth. O stvaranju åoveka. Donald 1989. Louis. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 1. Franc 1998. F. Karl 1959. Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. Krãñanska antropologija. Grand Rapids. Dau 1921. Concordia Publishing House. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 2. Bloesh. Sveti 2001. T. N° 9 CITIRANA DELA Bloesh. A. Emil 1953. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. Bente and W. . Fairweather. Philadelphia:The Westminster Press. MI.

Praroditeljski greh. Manastir Kelije. Jovan 2001.verujem. Karl 1982. Manastir Kelije. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Zagreb. Rahner. Rouz. . Kanoni sa sinode u Dorthrehtu 1618 – 1619. Zagreb. Åovjek kao osoba. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost. Herder & Herder. www. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 2. Justin 1980. Beograd. Reformed Free Publishing Association. Jasmin. adresa: www. Marengo. New Ed. Åovekov Pad. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Scola. Prades 2003. Five Points of Calvinism Michigan.org Nemet. Tudoran. Herman. Justin 1980. Isidor 2003. Van Baren 1976. Popoviñ. Stanje åoveka pre i posle pada. Beograd. Novi Sad: Beseda. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 1. Serafim nd. Novi Sad: Krãñanski centar „Dobroga Pastira“ i Teoloãki fakultet – Novi Sad. Popoviñ. Dimitrije 2007. Teologija stvaranja.verujem.org Romanidis. Fundations of Christian Faith. Osijek. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost. Ladislav 2003. Popadiñ. Miliñ.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 91 Hanko.

92

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Ware, Kallistos 1979. The Orthodox Way New York, St Vladimirs Seminary Press. Pope, Hugh T. 1910. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII. New York, Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Palmieri A. 1911. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI, New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Pope Pius XII 1950. Humani Generis: Encyclical of Popr Pius XII, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/ documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html Pope Poul VI 1965. Gaudium et Spes: Pastoral constitution n the church in the modern world, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/ archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_co ns_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html Waterworth, J. 1848. The Council of Trent: The canons and decrees of the sacred and oecumenical Council of Trent, London, Dolman.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

93

PECCATUM ORIGINALE – COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE Resume:
There are considerable differencies related to understanding of the original sin in three major christian traditions: Eastern Orthodox, Romancatholic and Protestant. Eastern orthodox anthropology presumes that man did not lost ability of spiritual understanding after the fall, but Gods image (icon) still resides, although corrupted. Roman Catholic tradition insists that human nature is not totally corrupted although ability to do good is deeply weakened, but not completely lost. Although at first glance similar to the Orthodox, Roman Catholic anthropology differs significantly in terms of understanding human nature, mainly because of introduction of the concept donum superadditum. In contrast, prevailing Protestant view stands on pesimistic Augustiniane viewpoint of total depravity. Key words: original sin, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Sergej Beuk Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

95 UDK 22.08:230.11 Primljeno: 5.03.2010 Prihvañeno 10.5.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

OSNOVNE BIBLIJSKE VERE
U radu na temu povezanosti biblijske vere i æivota, autor pruæa moguñe odgovore na pitanja: ãta je religijska vera i koji su elementi biblijskog verskog koncepta? Promiãljajuñi o savremenosti kao o krizi verskog identiteta, rad nam donosi osnovne teoloãke premise hriãñanskog koncepta Boæije egzistencije u svetu kroz pojmove kao ãto su ’’opãta vera’’ i ’’dar vere’’, bez kojih nije moguñe prepoznati Boæiju prisutnost u i meœu ljudima. Takoœe, analizom teksta iz tradicionalnog reformisanog (kalvinistiåkog) dokumenta ’’Belgijskog veroispovedanja’’autor iznosi tezu da hristologija protestantsko – evanœeoskog tipa ima korene u teologiji Æana Kalvina i ostalih reformisanih mislilaca. Kljuåne reåi: Religija, Biblija, vera, Bog, Hristos, Sveti Duh, teologija darova, dar vere.

Uvod
Od kada postoji, ljudsko biñe stoji pred jednim od temeljnih pitanja egzistencije koje glasi: ko je Bog i ãta je religijska vera? Da li je to samo verovanje u natprirodno, nevidljivo i samodovoljno biñe ili se religijsko, kao specifiåno versko iskustvo, moæe konkretizovati? Zaãto postoje razliåiti religijski sistemi i da li svi svedoåe o istom fenomenu? Po åemu je Biblija drugaåija od drugih religijskih spisa?

96

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

U XIX, a naroåito u XX veku moæemo primetiti intelektualnu teænju za sintetizacijom (ili, bolje reñi, sinkretizacijom) razliåitih i åesto nespojivih religiskih sistema: od pojave teozofskog pokreta (kao formalne preteåe Nju Ejdæa), preko antropozofije, spiritizma i razliåitih tantriåkih kultova, pa do pokuãaja hinduizacije Zapada, kroz vaiãnizam – kriãnaizam, meditativne tehnike i jogu, razliåita panteistiåka i/ili pananteistiåka uåenja i intenzive prosvetljenja, savremeni åovek pokuãava da se izbavi iz krletke besmisla, alijenacije i smrti. Meœutim, da li smo posle svega na pragu odgovora? Da li smo sreñniji i bliæi istini? Da li je svet postao bolje mesto za æivot? Veñ dvadeset vekova Hristos poziva ljude na veru pokajanja i preumljenja; na promenu svesti srca i ljubav prema bliænjima reåima: ’’Evo stojim na vratima i kucam: ako ko åuje glas moj i otvori vrata, uñi ñu k njemu i veåerañu s njime, i on sa mnom.’’ (Otk. 3, 20) On åeka da mu otvorimo vrata i pozovemo na agape – gozbu, u sigurnosti iskrene i istinske biblijske vere.

Definicije religijske vere
Ako poœemo od najopãtije definicije da je religija ’’...odnos izmeœu nas i Biña izvan nas’’ (Everett, 2009: 10), onda religijska vera predstavlja specifiåan oblik poverenja/pouzdanja u Vrhovnu Realnost – u Boga ili bogove.1 U tom pravcu idu i sledeñe definicije religijske vere: ona je ’’...verovanje, razumevanje i oboæavanje Vrhovnog Uma i Volje koja usmerava Vaseljenu i odræava moralni odnos sa ljudima.’’ (Marlineau, 1888: 15). Moæemo primetiti da autor smatra da je religijska vera nemoguña bez kognitivnog i etiåkog aspekta, kojima se odgoneta Volja Tvorca i ostvaruje neraskidiv odnos sa tvorevinom. Ona je i voljno istraæivanje Istine,2 unutraãnji
1

Vidi: Schaff, Philip, New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1954.

2 Vidi: Hexham, Irving, Concise Dictionary of Religion, Regent College Press, Vancouver, 1999.

naroåito internet. pogotovu u smislu opãte sekularizacije kakva je danas na delu. Springer. New York. to je stav åije prihvatanje nije motivisano bilo kakvim unutrasnjim dokazom. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. Kniter i Madæets zakljuåuju da religijska vera:’’. 1998. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. trebalo da se uhvati u koãtac sa postmodernim shvatanjem Svetog. 2007: 445) I pored iznetog. Iako u mnogo åemu prevaziœena. Espin.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 97 stav i posebno uverenje3 koje podrazumeva transpersonalni odnos åiji je izvor u Bogu.nalazi svoju istinitost u ultimativnoj stvarnosti. bez posebnog zahteva za razumskim i kritiåkim delovanjem. dok bi sa druge. AltaMira Press. uviœamo teãkoñu definisanja vere: ona. Stanton. sa drugim ljudima i celom planetom. mora obuhvatiti razliåitost religijskih iskustava.. bez stvarnog uåeãña misaonog. 1851: 180). ne zanemarujuñi istoriju religija. Vidi: Leeming. ovako izneta. uviœamo koliko je naã zadatak teæak. niti razliåite kontekstualizacijske religijske forme verovanja. Madden. William.. Na ovom mestu preneo bih misao Åarlsa Buka iz 1851. David. Ako tu dodamo i savremene komunikoloãke standarde i medije. prakse i kontinuiranog samoposmatranja koje se reflektuje na ponaãanje i stavove. Kathryn and Marlan. istini koju ne sagledavamo sopstvenim razumom i iskustvom. Vidi: Swatos. preko lamaistiåkog budizma. oseñanja i fenomena – od afriåkog fetiãizma. Lanham.’’ (Nickoloff. do islama. 2009.. 5 .4 Zakljuåujemo da religijska vera: ’’ . vec autoritetom ili svedoåenjem nekog drugog koji je otkriva ili se na nju poziva’’ (Buck.5 dok Hil. U ’’Enciklopoediji religije i druãtva’’ moæemo proåitati da je religijska vera sistem verovanja. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc... definicija religijske vere. godine. Za autora je vera svedoåanstvo drugog u kome se ona iznenada otvara za nas. s jedne strane. 2007. predstavlja temelj za miãljenje mnogih da je religioznost a priori iracionalna i samo mistiåka delatnost duha.obuhvata celokupan æivot koji je u odgovarajuñoj vezi sa Bogom. razvija odnos sa tom stvarnoãñu i 3 4 Vidi: Encyclopedia Britannica. koja veoma specifiåno opisuje problem definisanja religijske vere: ’’Vera je ona saglasnost koju dajemo neåijem predlogu.

Gospod je.. Pateñi. Ne smemo. na æalost. od uopãtavanja.6 Iako neiscrpna kao tema. a ne delo ljudske mudrosti. obznanjuje i poziva: ’’Ne sme biti zaboravljeno da je za bibijsku veru krucijalno ne ono ãto o Bogu åovek govori. religijska vera je neophodni i poåetni åinilac razumevanja fenomena religijskog (Svetog) u åoveku. 1996.98 Teoloãki åasopis. Thomas. po sebi. a posebno onih koje iznose Isus Hristos i Njegovi apostoli. Takav Bog – milosrdan i svemoguñ – jeste poåetna taåka u razumevanju religijske vere Starog i Novog zaveta. Madges. odnosto. .veñ ono ãto Bog o sebi objavljuje’’ (Lewis. Definicije biblijske vere Biblijska vera je izraz koji se koristi za definisanje Svetopisamskog uåenja. koji se otkrio ljudskom rodu svojom logosnom prirodom kroz Sveto pismo. postaje Boæija jedinstvena objava. Knitter. Daniel. dañemo i svoju definiciju religijske vere: ona je specifiåan oblik svesnosti koji podrazumeva veru u Boga. Faith. kao Tvorca ljudi i Univerzuma. 1953: 113). zaobiñi ni problem slobodne volje koja nalazi svoje mesto u verskom. plod izabranja i posebnog 6 Vidi: Jordan. vera podrazumeva slobodu miãljenja i izbor æivotnog stava. Lanham. time. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. druãtvu i istoriji. Biblija. kojom se Bog otkriva. Biblijski oblik religijske vere jeste spiritualna manifestacija Njegove Svevolje koja poseduje dve komponente: veru u Boga i veru u Njegovu Reå. 1995: 34). tako. u ovom trenutku. Freedom and Rationality. 1997: 3). ãto podvlaåe Flinova i Tomasova: ’’ Religijska vera je jedinstven izbor verovanja u Boga i æivljenja u odnosu sa Njim’’ (Flynn. Howard – Snyder. N° 9 pokreñe ljude da prihvate naåin æivota koji proishodi iz takvog odnosa’’ (Hill. kao stalno aktuelan i aktivan princip. apsolutni Kreator neba i zemlje i Odræavalac kreacije. Jeff.. je predstavljena kao dar Svetog Duha. Bogonadahnuti tekst Biblije zapoåinje æivot u okviru civilizacije s jednom jasnom namerom – ocrtavanjem ljudskom rodu Boæijeg plana spasenja koje se ostvaruje verom: ’’U Novom zavetu vera.

spasenju. ali da li je to dovoljno? Grudem i Parsvel odgovaraju: ’’Prava spasavajuña vera ukljuåuje znanje. ali i da je vernik opravdan pred Njim i Njegovom svetom voljom. 2.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 99 otkrivenja koje ljudsko srce nije samo osmislilo’’ (Berkhof. 1. vera nije moguña i da znanje mora pratiti odreœeno oseñanje. usinovljenju.3). Biblijska vera. znanja i razumevanja’’ (Hodgson. 1979: 1).. potvrda Boæije promisli i naåin soterioloãkog ostvarivanja. 6). Jasno je da bez izraæene emotivistiåke crte. Pravednost Boæija se odnosi na sve izabrane vernike i ne zavisi od ljudskih æelja ili htenja (Post. spasavajuña vera. biblijska vera nije samo postignuñe ljudskog biña koje traga za Bogom. veñ primarno Boæiji neposredovani akt u bogotragaocu koji je spreman za primanje takvog milosrdnog poklona. Vrste biblijske vere Iako postoji mnogo razliåitih podela. Istine o Svetoj Trojici. 29). odobravanje i liåno poverenje’’ (Grudem. 3. kako vidimo. crkvi i sl. 5.. 1999: 307). 15. posveñenja i ljubavi. mi ñemo se u tekstu ograniåiti na osnovne vrste vere koje moæemo nañi u Svetom pismu: 1. koje se sastoji od pouzdanja.vera je vrsta miãljenja. jesu elementi doktrinarne vere bez kojih hriãñanstvo uopãte ne bi bilo moguñe (Jd. Ona je potpuno poverenje u . dnevna vera i 6 dar vere. podrazumeva shvatanje poruke Pisma. opravdavajuña vera. Purswell. kojeg ne moæe biti bez jasnog sagledavanja Njegove volje kroz Reå i zato Hodæson naglaãava: ’’. posredniåka vera. 4. 2001: 19). Ona je uvek individualno fokusirana na Svetog Sina i Njegovo Boæansko delo na zemlji (Dl. Ona je i poåetak biblijski usmerenog æivota. Opravdavajuña vera poåiva na uverenju da je Bog pravedan. Kao ãto moæemo razumeti. Spasavajuña vera usmerena je na iskupljujuñu ærtvu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda i Spasitelja. 1. doktrinarna vera. Posredniåka vera podrazumeva sposobnost razumevanja Boæanskog delovanja u nama. Doktrinarna ili opãta vera se odnosi na osnovna uåenja Svetog pisma i predstavlja polaziãte svih daljih versko – teoloãkih razmatranja.

kroz Reå. 1 – 3). Dar vere moæemo razumeti samo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha.100 Teoloãki åasopis. 11. kroz Logos – Sina.com/biblical_faith. dovodi nas do Boga. 7). 2. kroz ceo æivot i u svakom trenutku (Jev. Bez pouzdanja u Njegovu promisao. 5. 10. ne samo za pojedince koji svedoåe o svom daru. milost i ærtvu nije moguñe razumeti biblijski oblik vere. Znanje o Bogu utvrœuje veru Naãa spoznaja Istine. ãto je krucijalno. dopustivãi mu da se obrati i iskupi (Rim. 23). kao i zakljuåci koje moæemo izvesti7: 1. Dnevna vera ukazuje na neophodnost permanentnog verovanja u Boga i Njegovu Silu. Ta vera je jasna. Ona obuhvata svakodnevno usmerenje na razvijanje nove hristocentriåne svesti koja nam ukazuje na dnevnu Boæiju prisutnost (II Kor. mi otkrivamo sve ãto je Bog o sebi dozvolio da se spozna.greatbiblestudy. Vera u Boga utvrœuje pouzdanje Vera je uvek odnos – od Boga. ãto znaåi da je to jedan od osnovnih darova koje Bog daje crkvi na proslavljenje. 10. kao izvora Pravde. On je.php . Jasno je da biblijska vera sadræi dva elementarna principa: a) veru u Njegovu volju i b) veru u Njegova obeñanja. stalna pouzdanost u Boæiju prisutnost i voœstvo. 7 Vidi: http://www. tako da mu se liånost u potpunosti predaje u poverenju i ljubavi (Gal. N° 9 izbavljajuñu snagu Gospoda. 2. 11). veñ i za ãirenje same crkve kroz evangelizaciju i misiologiju (Jev. ka ljudskom biñu. 20). Prouåavajuñi Sveto pismo. iz kojih proishode svi ostali elementi vere i potpunog poverenja. Iako Boæija suãtina ostaje skrivena. ali i to biñe odgovara liånom verom svom Tvorcu. otkrio Sebe svetu.

koji je usklaœen sa tipom liånosti. o svemu brine. i izabrani) i . ona je i poverenje. a koji odgovaraju odreœenim ljudima i njihovim sluæbama’’ (Stott. ãto je. u celini moæemo nazvati ’’darovima sluæbe’’ ili joã preciznije ’’darovima sluæenja’’ svima kojima je to sluæenje potrebno. Bog je Biñe bez poåetka i bez kraja..Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 101 3. 1996: 3). dok kroz odnos sa bliænjima pokazujemo pozitivan stav prema celokupnoj tvorevini. ne ni za liåni duhovni razvoj. nije samo oseñanje. ali i odgovornoãñu koja svaka sluæba u crkvi sa sobom nosi.’’ (Snyder. 13). episkop Amfilohije. po Pismu. sve zna. Bog je pun ljubavi prema svim ljudima i svima stvorenjima’’ (Episkop Danilo. Tvorca neba i zemlje i svega vidljivog i nevidljivog. i nada. 1974: 20). 1964: 87). ali je svuda prisutan. primarno. onda je upravo dar vere jedan od osnovnih aktualizacija Treñeg Lica Trojice u biñu verujuñih. Ta se ljubav uvek odnosi na Boga i Isusa Hrista. Iz svega iznetog uviœamo teãkoñu precizne analize vrsta biblijske vere. Autor koristi termin ’’kapaciteti’’ da bi naglasio pouzdanost i volumen odreœenog dara. Stot daje opãtu definiciju darova Duha: ’’Duhovni darovi su odreœeni kapaciteti dodeljeni po blagodati Boæijoj i kroz Njegovu snagu. iz åega sledi da svi verujuñi mogu biti nosioci darova (åime ne postaju.. Pouzdanje u Boga utvrœuje ljubav Sveto pismo na mnogo mesta ponavlja da vera pokazuje svoj efekat samo ako je bazirana na ljubavi. i æivot. Dar vere Ako pokuãamo da versko odgonetnemo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. naravno. ãto znaåi da Duhovne darove. veñ zbog opãteg dobra. vaæno. 1976: 132). ali i velika misterija pred svakim biñem koje teæi odgonetanju osnovnih istina æivota i smrti: ’’Prava vera je vera u jednoga Boga u Trojici. sve vidi. Snajder se nadovezuje: ’’Duhovni darovi su dati ne samo za liåno uæivanje. sve moæe. veñ naåin egzistencije iz svesti novog duha i oåiãñenog srca (I Kor. On je Duh koji se ne vidi. Flin potvrœuje: ’’Dar bih opisao kao posebnu kvalifikaciju odobrenu od strane [Svetog] Duha svakom verniku za osposobljavanje sluæenja u okviru Tela Hristovog’’ (Flynn. Ljubav. i ljubav. automatski. åak.

koji su jednako vaæni. 8 Vidi: Horton. Navedeni aspekt se pojavljuje samo u situacijama kada postoji konkretna pretnja po zajednicu i on je neophodan element svih sluæbi u crkvi. a koje moæemo oznaåiti kao instrumentalni. Nottingham. Assembly of God Publishing House. socijalno – eklisijalnom planu. takoœe. kako za pastoralnu. 1934. dar vere moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu sposobnost åiji je izvor u Svetom Duhu i sluæi samoizgradnji verujuñih. The Gifts of the Spirit. rastu i utvrœivanju crkve i evangelizaciji sveta. koristeñi svaki resurs radi ostvarivanja odreœenog plana. kao instrumentalizacije Boæije promisli8: hriãñansku ili opãtu veru moæemo razumeti kao izraz Boæije ljubavi i prisutnosti u æivotu ljudi. moæemo posmatrati i kroz tri aspekta. Pored mnogih faktora po kojima se Dar prepoznaje. a elementi su: Biblija. Uzimajuñi reåeno u obzir.102 Teoloãki åasopis. prvenstveno. Instrumentalni aspekt dara vere odnosi se. po sebi. slavljenje i sl. niti bi takav dar bio platforma za razumevanje ostalih darova Svetog Duha. b) pouzdanost i c) izvesnost. ka prisutnim vernicima i podrazumeva se u pastoralnoj sluæbi. dok je dar vere specifiåan. tako i za dijakonijsku sluæbu. Vizionarski aspekt usmeren je na osobe koje imaju moguñnost da sagledaju buduñe potrebe crkve. ali i baziåan dar Svetog Duha koji deluje na opãtem. Ako bismo svoju paænju okrenuli ka daru vere. Dar vere. naveli bismo samo tri: a) usmerenost. N° 9 svi mogu doprinositi razvoju crkve. Dar vere. Bez njih. Navedeni aspekt dara Duha uvek je okrenut ka spolja – ka zajednici. Harold. Interventni aspekt podrazumeva specifiåan oblik uvida i snage da se preduprede ili suzbiju krize u crkvi. joã na poåetku moramo napraviti jasnu distinkciju izmeœu hriãñanske vere. dar vere ne bi bio prepoznat ni blagosloven. . molitve. okrenut ka unutra – ka pojedincu sa posebnom idejom i doæivljajem i neophodan je. Moæemo zakljuåiti da su darovi Svetog Duha kompleks razliåitih sposobnosti koji sluæe razvoju crkve i svih njenih vernika. i dara vere. vizionarski i interventni. Vizionarski aspekt je intristiåan. propoved. na veru kao instrument sluæenja.

ne mislimo da je samo vera ta koja nas opravdava. Prevedeno i prireœeno prema: ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. Kada ta 9 Za viãe informacija vidi Predgovor dr Jasmina Miliña u ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. Ali.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 103 tako. koja za cilj ima stvaranje spiritualnih potencija za razvoj naroda Boæijeg. 2008. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. Stoga. Dakle. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. a vera je sredstvo koje nas dræi u zajednici s Njim i svim Njegovim dobroåinstvima. U sluåaju poslednjeg. A Isus Hristos je naãa pravednost. Tordinci. 3. Chuck Baynard. moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu intervenciju u sistemu Boæijeg plana. jer nam prepuãta sve zasluge i sva sveta dela koja je uåinio za nas i umesto nas. s pravom. s Pavlom. veñ je ona samo sredstvo kojim prigrljujemo Hrista.9 U svom 22. Tordinci. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith.) Doktrinarni dokument ’’Belgijsko veroispovedanje’’ predstavlja najstariji i najznaåajniji izraz teoloãke misli Reformisanih crkava Evrope i sveta. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. reñi da Hristos nije dovoljan. Chuck. jer bi to znaåilo da je Isus Hrist samo napola Spasitelj. onaj koji ima Hrista po veri. ålanu koji nosi naslov ’’Pravednost vere’’ moæemo proåitati10: ’’Verujemo kako na sledeñi naåin spoznajemo ove velike tajne: Sveti Duh nam u srcu pali plamen istinske vere koja prihvata Isusa Hrista sa svim Njegovim zaslugama. naãu pravednost. 28). 2008. moæemo reñi da smo opravdani samo ’verom’ ili verom ’bez vrãenja Zakona’ (Rim. te da ne traæi niãta ãto je izvan Njega. i Baynard. u potpunosti je spasen. åineñi da naãe srce postaje Njegovo. Pravednost vere u ’’Confessio Belgica’’ (1561. neizostavno sledi – ili u Hristu ne nalazimo sve ãto nam je potrebno za spasenje ili je sve potrebno u Njemu. poãteno govoreñi. 10 . veñ da je i neãto drugo potrebno za spasenje je najveñe bogohuljenje. Zato. 2008.

’’ . zatvorimo oåi i zakoraåimo. tako da slobodno moæemo govoriti o korenima razumevanja uloge i znaåaja Isusa Hrista upravo kroz dela Æana Kalvina i dokumente reformisanih/prezviterijanskih crkava. ona zauzima sve mentalne kapacitete i podrazumeva ceo æivot – od svakodnevnih misli i odluka. ili nije i tu ne moæe biti sredine! Tako. pak. Dakle. æiva realnost koju je moguñe ostvariti i koja se dostiæe u srcu i umu bogotraæitelja. (Jev. poverenje u ljubav koju gaji Otac prema svojoj deci. pali se æar predanosti åiji je nedvosmislen izraz vera u Mesiju kao Spasitelja ljudi. do potpune predanosti Bogu.. i dokazivanje onog ãto ne vidimo. a moæda. a svoje svedoåanstvo nalazi kroz dobroåinstvo. postajemo opravdani verom. naglaãavajuñi hristocentriåno versko usmerenje. Istaknimo joã neãto: sve tradicionalne protestantske i evanœeoske crkve prate izneti teoloãki credo. ona su viãe nego dovoljna da nas razreãe naãeg greha.. iznad svega. ali i tek zapoået. 11. a vera u Njega putovanje do u izvesnost spasenja. Vera je pozvanost i povezanost.’’ Jasno je da reformisana (kalvinistiåka) teologija svoje korene vidi iskljuåivo u Pismu koje potvrœuje nebesku ulogu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda. Vera u iskupiteljsku ærtvu na krstu dovoljna je za veåni æivot. verom.104 Teoloãki åasopis. tvrdo åekanje onog åemu se nadamo. Moæemo napisati tomove knjiga o biblijskoj veri. Hristos ili jeste. åime soterioloãki put biva osiguran. ali moæemo se i prepustiti reåima apostola Pavla: ’’Vera je. Hristos nas je pozvao da ga sledimo i tome ne moæemo niãta dodati. vera je sredstvo koje nas odræava u zajednici sa Gospodom. Zakljuåak Nezahvalno je iznositi zakljuåak na temu biblijske vere. a po volji Svetog Oca. 1). Zato. i svaka sumnja u tu istinu iskljuåuje nas iz kruga izabranih. istrajnost i trpeljivost. Ta izvesnost je konkretna. pravednost i ljubav. ali tako ãto prihvatamo i uranjamo u Hrista. N° 9 dobroåinstva postanu naãa. niti oduzeti – On je put. Posredstvom Svetog Duha.

Christian Faith. Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje. Hendrikus. Also. 2008. Chuck Baynard. belief. God. CITIRANA DELA: Baynard. Holy Spirit. the work brings us the basic premise of the Christian theological concept of Gods existence in the world through terms such as ’’general faith’’ and the ’’gift of faith’’. 2008. Tordinci. Eerdmans Publishing Co. Berkhof. Key words: Religion. Bible. without which it is not possible to recognize Gods presence in and among people. Christ. by analyzing the text from the traditional reformed (Calvinist) document ’’Belgian confession’’ author introduces the thesis that Christology of protestant-evangelical type has roots in the theology of Jean Calvin and other reformed thinkers. Chuck. 1979. B.. which basis is connection between biblical faith and life. theology of gifts. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. . Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. gift of faith. author is providing possible answers on the following questions: what is religious faith and which are the elements of biblical belief concept? Considering actuality as a form of crisis of religious identity. Wm.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 105 Summary In this paper. Grand Rapids.

Religion and Theology. Leslie. . Irving. Biblio Life. 2007. 1851. Encyclopedia Britannica. 19 Gifts of the Spirit. Knitter. Brennan. Concise Dictionary of Religion. Lanham. Philadelphia. N° 9 Buck. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. Crissy & Markley. Christian Faith. 1995. Flynn. Mystic. The psychological elements of religious faith. Nema lepãe vere od hriãñanske.106 Teoloãki åasopis. 2009. Charles. Wheaton. Thomas. 1996. Twenty – Third Publications. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Faith. Srpska pravoslavna Eparhija sremska. Paul and Madges. 1997. Gloria. Hill. Flynn. episkop Amfilohije. Grand Rapids. Jeff. Hodgson. A Theological Dictionary. 1999. Charleston. Episkop Danilo. Victor Books. Bible Doctrine. Louisville. Living Faith. Vanc couver. Wayne. 2001. Hexham. Westminster John Knox Press. William. Peter. Sremski Karlovci. Regent College Press. Carroll. Everett. Charles. Grudem. Zondervan. Eileen. 1974. 1999. Purswell.

Kathryn and Marlan. izdavaå nepoznat. Stott. Philadelphia. Nottingham. James. Baptism and Fullness. Inter – Varsity Press. Westminster Press. James. 1934. Downers Grove.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 107 Horton. AltaMira Press. Edwin. Baker Book House. London. Harold. The Biblical Faith and Christian Freedom. 2009. Inter – Varsity Press. Nickoloff. A Study of Religion. Marlineau. Stanton. Espin. David. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. Springer. An Introductory Dictionary of Theology and Religious Studies. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. Orlando. Assembly of God Publishing House. Collegeville. Lewis. Lanham. 1964. Howard. 1976. Swatos. Philip. 1888. William. 1953. The Problem of Wine Skins. Leeming. 1998. Grand Rapids. New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge. Snyder. New York. Madden. 1954. 2007. Downers Grove. John. Schaff. . Liturgical Press. The Gifts of the Spirit.

theology of God. philosophy of science. The confrontation with this critical approach to theology eventually culminated in an intellectual and personal crisis. a popular approach to religious studies today. I was faced with the challenge to rethink and to reevaluate the theological assumptions that I had become accustomed to and that I had. But we see this as no reason to abandon theology as God talk.2010 Originalni nauåni rad Speaking of God Key words: theology. The main argument is that theology is in essence God talk and specifically talk about the identity of God in contrast to religious studies where God is talked about in terms of a human projection. God talk.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet By Csongor –Szabolcs Bene 109 UDK 211:215 Primljeno: 01.04.04. theology is not only possible as God talk but also justified. to a certain degree. religious studies. biblical theology. The crisis is best described in terms of a challenge. rationality. revelation. rather by focusing on a biblical theological understanding of the identity of God. . the identity of God. Under the Line It was during my studies that I first became acquainted with what is known as ‘the religious scientific critique of God and theology’.2010 Prihvañeno: 05. In this article the author explores the differences between theology and religious studies by focusing on the theology of God. taken for granted. God talk when compared to the demands of modern scientific theory it seems that it is impossible.

The second assumption is related to the first: because religion is objectively analyzed. Above the line. Above these figures. This ultimately means that all that there is above the line is out of reach. from the respective religion. unidentified and. The fourth assumption is that the religious experience is a one-sided affair. closest to the all-dividing line between humanity and God. Buddhism and Hinduism. On a fundamental level this means that the line cannot be crossed either way. Above the books. a couple of matchstick figures were drawn. In the scientific community the researcher of religion must take the position of methodical atheism. from bottom up. From an objective and uninvolved perspective all religious experiences seem quite similar. points only in one direction. in philosophical terms the physical and the metaphysical. The arrow. and humans of all that is physical. above the line the word God was posited. since its analysis is objective. The first assumption is that this image of religions today is the most scientifically responsible. The ul- . by consequence unhistorical entity. The one engaged in the study of religions must not be biased by any of the religions under consideration. Judaism.110 Teoloãki åasopis. the scientific approach presupposes certain similarities between human religious experiences. which indicates the dynamics of the religious experience. The matchstick figures symbolized the major religions in the world today: Christianity. The third assumption has to do with what is above the line: God. All that there is under the line is what matters. The line on the white board indicated the divide between the natural and the supernatural. after all. God exists as an undefined. at the bottom of the board. These indicated that all religions have a certain ‘holy book’ that contains their teachings. God is posited above the all-dividing line between the physical and the metaphysical. under the line. N° 9 The argumentation in class went like this: on a white-board. Islam. a line was drawn. God was thus part of all that is metaphysical. The drawing is based on certain assumptions about the reality of the religious experience and the consequent scientific analysis of it. as the one who provides access to God. an exceptional figure and a God. the name was written of a key figure. they all have a holy book. on a second row. books were drawn. which guarantees scientific objectivity.

The heart of the problem is that a nonspecific conception of God. has a history. I was familiar with the fact that theologians talk about God as a well-identified entity. It is no longer a talk about God as such. In post-Kantian terminology. in terms of divinity. as a theologian. ever-present etc. God is not just a general concept. but has a Name. But ultimately this God has its home in the human consciousness and ability to project a superior higher being. can be identified. God is a generic term. As a Christian theologian. but talk of the religious feelings of human beings. can be called upon and thus.e. So God is well identified through the stories told by his people through the ages. Since human consciousness is bound to all that is under the line. and on the other well described by abstract definitions like all-powerful. everything beyond that line is a projection and in the final analysis non-existent. which stands for ‘a being up there’. i. mute being who is decorated with superlatives. theology. The irony is that this divine being is on the one hand unidentified. This is precisely the underlying principle. from a religious-scientific (Religionswissenschaftlich) perspective. God has acted at given times and in certain places to a specific group of people. God is . In history. I am challenged to consider the possibility of theology as talk about God. does not do justice to the Christian theological talk of God. The reason is that. God is defined as a distant. What I am about to challenge in this article is the religious scientific approach to theology specifically its ‘generic conception of God’ in terms of ‘the highest divine being’. which is at the heart of the modern criticism of theology as a discipline. It is evident that from a Christian theological perspective there are some problems with the above-mentioned critical approach. no people and no places. God is a projection of the human mind. taking into account the above criticism. but it is intrinsically bound to the projections of the human mind. have been asking the following question: what about the identity of God? From a Christian theological perspective.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 111 timate assumption is that the Divine is not an entity on its own. In the face of this criticism I. faceless. all-knowing. It is a God with no history. This implies the obvious conclusion: God is not an entity on its own but just another faculty of the human imagination.

Charlesworth. wisdom sayings and testimonies document Gods history with these people. theology is a discipline by which the believers seek to express their beliefs in a reasonable and ordered way. as a way of showing our specific take on the matter. will also become more evident. to a certain 1 St. It is this theological understanding of God that does not match the modern scientific perspective of the divine. The consequent stories. it is wise to first look at some well-known definitions by representative theologians through the various ages of Christian theology. Proslogion: with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo. translated with an introduction and philosophical commentary by M. It is a classic definition. Anselm of Canterbury’s classic formulation. “faith seeking understanding”1 is one of the most well known definitions of theology. By making explicit what I understand theology to be. N° 9 talked about in terms of appearing.112 Teoloãki åasopis. According to the anselmian formula. God has an identity. Definitions often carry within them the unspoken presuppositions which lie at the heart of one’s theological work. speaking to them and acting in their lives. fides quaerens intellectum. Here the identity of God has to do with a biblical theological understanding of who God is and how that understanding helps us to address the problems of a religious-scientific approach to theology in general and to the theology of God. We will present our definition of theology alongside these definitions. These experiences are related to a certain tradition. consequently the identity of God. 1965).J. which is still popular and much appreciated by theologians. (Oxford: Clarendon Press. meeting people. In order to understand what Christian theology is. laws. What is Theology? Beyond a personal motivation lies also a certain understanding of what the discipline of theology is. Theology then is a process of rationalization of the believer’s faith experiences. songs. Anselm. .

With the emergence of scholasticism came also the uprooting of theology as a Church discipline. Theology during this early period was fully a church discipline that belonged to the community of faith.F. one could talk about a separate development in modernity.3 In modernity. which ought to be taught in an academic setting? If theology is strictly related to the Church. faith. Theology was a multifaceted discipline that gave a rational synthesis of the Church’s Credos. and by consequence. 3 See. and specifically with the God-human relationship. are all important aspects in one’s definition of what the discipline of theology entails. mainly on talking about God’s being in light of the challenges presented by the critics of the Christian faith. then what defines its content and aims and what is its relevance to the life of the Church? Thus far. Theology moved. “Theology. The early church fathers focused. in their theology.2 and also elucidated the content of faith with regard to beliefs that were contrary to the Credo. experience. This break is significant for the way theology is understood today. as it were. a scientific discipline. Questions are often raised as one inquires about modern theology: is theology a discipline restricted to the life of the Church or is it a public discipline (meaning apart from the Church). a subject taught in the academia. from the Church into the university.. Theology became more of a system of thought. then what is its public relevance? If theology is a matter of public interest. Wright. with a strict demarcation be2 By Credo we mean the theological and confessional achievements of the various Councils of the Church roughly before 400 AD. . community and talk. This faith was hallmarked by the scandalous claim that God had become a human being in the person of Jesus Christ. D. In the Middle Ages a certain shift took place in the way theology was understood. Rationality. the character of theology has been mostly shaped by its position within the gap between church and university. 680.” in NDT. Most theological works were dealing with the problems related Christology.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 113 community and to the individual person.

Systematic Theology. 2000). J. 141. (Oxford: Blackwell. (Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1. with signs other than linguistic – in the church called “sacrament” and “sacrifice” – or by other behavior of our community. between us and Him. Christian Theology. H. that Jesus is risen and what that means?”6 “Theology is reflection upon God whom Christians worship and adore. 32. The Triune God. systematic theology is the reflection on and the ordered articulation of faith..”7 Berkhof.. 1997)..114 Teoloãki åasopis. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. while on the other hand. theologians try to show the relevance of theology for public matters.. N° 9 tween church theology and academic theology. whether to humankind as message or to God in praise and petition – for of course the church speaks the gospel also to God.E. R. they also have to deal with the relevance of academic theology for the life and practice of the Church. Theology for the Community of God. vol. 1. 5.”4 “Basically. The definitions of the modern period are marked by the struggle to precisely define theology as a discipline. The church’s specific enterprise of thought is devoted to the question. 1997). S. 2002). 7 McGrath.W. The following classic definitions are reminiscent of this very ambiguity. Christelijk Geloof. 8 druk (Kampen: Kok. “Theology: is the systematic reflection on the content of the relationship.”5 “…theology is the thinking internal task of speaking the gospel.. in a language. which God in Jesus Christ has established. 6 Jenson. On the one hand. nd . Modern theologians often seek to bridge this gap. A. pleading it before him and praising him for it. 4 5 e Grenz. How shall we get it across. An Introduction. 2 Ed.

2002).. New Edition. theology is understood and defined as an intellectual discipline. the Church.”8 “…Theology is about the knowledge of God. 2. theology is broadly defined in modernity as a discipline. This is not a mere translation of the Greek rendering of theos – logos. for it finds its roots and ends in her. The theologian’s task is to reflect on and to speak about the content of faith. i. God. but also about God himself. Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie. 10 The word theology is the convergence the two Greek words ‘theos’.10 rather. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. 1982).. theology. i. A. God kennen – met God leven. the content of faith. there are some common features that unite them: first. It may be in the church.word of or about God.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 115 “Now the matter.e. The ancient Greek philosophers used this . Van de Beek. and. To talk about God does 8 9 Barth. related in its aims and tasks to the theologian who reflects on the content of his faith. In short. The basic premise of our definition is that the task of theology is to talk about God. by implication. it is the classic understanding of what the exercise of theological work entails. is God Himself in his dealings with the world and the ensuing good message of His works. the content of theology.”9 Beyond the ambiguity of these definitions. Third. Theology in other words is talk about God.e. is critical and systematic reflection of the presupposition of the Church’s ministry of witness. in the academy or in the public square. However it is not only about the human ideas about God or the human religious feelings of human beings. But the context in which theological reflection and speaking happens may vary. Second. in community with others.God and ‘logos’ . K. (Nijkerk: Callenbach. (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans. theology happens in relationship with a faith community. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982. Theology is ultimately related to the church in an essential way.

in Christian thinking. but also a communal act that takes place in the context of a certain faith community. namely talk about God. This can be traced to the all-defining question of the Enlightenment: how do you know what you know? Most modern theologians struggled to definition for all teachings about metaphysics. Here we focus on this one aspect of theology. i. the Church through the ages. a discourse in verbal and nonverbal forms. and can also be addressed. It implies a certain way of talking about God. To talk about God is to talk about the identity of God. . God is not a general term for some abstract ‘high being’. The above definition of theology might be considered a narrow representation of what the task of theology might entail in its totality. but the contrary is true. Later.e. it became related specifically to the sum of the teachings about God in the Christian tradition. This critical note implies that theology is more than just talk about God. theology is also talk about the world and humanity. N° 9 not only refer to the act of utterance itself. the most fundamental question the theologian had to answer was an epistemological question. It is right. Therefore the understanding that theology is talk about God is central and directive here. but also to the broader meaning of what talk means. This is not only an individualistic endeavor. To formulate this in a question: who is this God. about whom we as theologians talk? Initially the answer to the question might seem obvious.116 Teoloãki åasopis. Theology is an articulated exteriorization of the theologian’s experiences related to God. On a fundamental level. The identity of God implies the actual presence of God in history. To talk about God and the identity of God is to talk about the God who is identified in and through the Biblical narratives. i. In the standard post-enlightenment theologies. The identity of God also implies that God is identified by a Name.e. because in a certain sense. our question about the identity of God is a departure from the kind of theological prolegomena developed during the eighteenth and nineteenth century. To talk about the identity of God is to talk about a God who is identified by specific events in time and space.

Theology in the post-enlightenment era was no longer about God as such but much more about whether or not it is possible for humans to understand anything about God. What essentially happened was that the epistemological question became the fundamental question for theology. from 1979 until his retirement in 2001. Our critical observation considering this shift is this: the kind of question one asks influences the kind of answer one receives. to replace the epistemological question how do you know? with the question who is God? Is it fundamentally possible to ask a different question and receive a different answer? In actuality this is a turn from an epistemological towards a theological foundation and understanding of theology.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 117 justify their theologies concerning this very question. Part of understanding the problem of modern theology is to define as clearly as possible what the problem actually is. Adriaanse.J. To avoid the risk of entering into a meta discussion of the subject. Thus Adriaanse’s 11 He has been the professor of Philosophy of Religion.11 His over-all work is an outstanding exposition concerning the problems of twentieth century theology. we have identified the work of the Dutch theologian H. In a way this is a different starting point than that of the classic post-Enlightenment prolegomena marked by epistemology. The question we want to ask here is this: is it possible. in theology. . Epistemological Criticism of Theology At the tail-end of the twentieth century the general feel in the field of theology was that the talk of God was not only problematic but also impossible. To ask the question who is God? is to ask about the identity of God. Ethics and Encyclopedia of Theology at the University of Leiden.

Karl Popper’s Conjectures and Refutations 13 is an excellent introduction to the history of the philosophy of science. Modern: in the sense that it deals with the core of Enlightenment ideology. knowledge and rationality. rather we use it to refer to the theological era which spans from the beginning of the eighteenth century up to the end of the twentieth century. The work of Adriaanse is intrinsically connected to the developments of the philosophy of science in general. Conjectures is the guide by which 12 For clarity’ sake. formal and systematic. Popper. After the historical considerations we will look at some of the formal aspects of the established order of knowing. Conjectures and Refutations.12 The Established Order of Knowing One of Adriaanse’s main arguments is that there is a certain order by which it can be established how and what one knows. What today is accepted as valid knowledge can be traced in the history of philosophy of science. The order of knowledge is subject to historical processes. The historical overview provides us with a broader perspective on the issues Adriaanse raises and also clearly defines his position in the field. Therefore it is important to shortly trace these developments. He is frequently compared with Kant. 13 K. and is seen by some as the bearer in . The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.118 Teoloãki åasopis. In it we will be able to formally analyze Adriaanse’s conception of experience. We will approach Adriaanse’s argument from three different perspectives: historical. the word modern in this context is not used in the sense of contemporary or today. (London: Routledge. See O’Hear’s assessment of Poppers importance in the field of the philosophy of science: “Large claims are made for Popper by his admirers. 1963). N° 9 work provides the vocabulary and the conceptual framework for our analysis of modern theology. From a systematic perspective we will see Adriaanse’s definition of what constitutes a valid theory of knowledge in its relationship to modern scientific method.R.

3-6.” His main contribution has been to the philosophy of science. Both the content and the method of knowledge are of interest here.1. As falsifying our theories is the one thing we can do effectively in science. Popper presents the fifteenth and sixteenth century tendencies through the juxtaposition of two representative philosophers: Bacon and Descartes. Not only what constitutes knowledge has gone through changes. and devise a new theory to account for the data – and it is worth underlining here that Popper sees the forming of theories as a matter of imaginative conjecture. what was considered science. 2004). Modern theology is mainly characterized by the influence of Enlightenment rationality. and abandoning any futile at verification or justification. that is. the Middle Ages and the Enlightenment. and its ensuing age of rationalism. as a discipline.14 Throughout history.” A. that is what we should do: test our theories empirically against the predications which follow from them. and the shape of theology in the twentieth century.) Karl Popper. In it we find a certain correlation between. we should abandon them. If they do not.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 119 we trace the main tendencies of two major periods in the philosophy of science. he is a believer in reason and in the power of reason to solve our problems. vol. Kant’s Critique. and see if they survive. on the whole and that theology has struggled to define itself in accorthe twentieth century of the Kanitan torch. After that he continues with the eighteenth century Enlightenment and the impact Kant had on the philosophy of science.” “Popper’s philosophy of science involves putting falsification center stage. 14 Popper. (London: Routledge. . Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. meaning: how do we know what we know? has gone through a series of changes. Adriaanse often notes that changes in scientific theory have had great influence on theology. in Conjectures. “Popper’s philosophy of science is marked by a deep hostility to any profession of certainty or attempt to claim justification for one’s theories. O’Hear (ed. Popper’s treatment of Kant offers us keen insights into the shape of the scientific theory during the eighteenth century. but also the method of acquiring knowledge. traces the history and development of the theory of science from an epistemological perspective.

Thus the truthfulness of God must make truth mani- 15 16 Popper.16 Bacon further distinguishes between true and false Method. in other words it may reveal itself. or prejudice. Bacon’s doctrine “might be described as the doctrine of the veritas Naturae. 5. Nature is an open book. 7. N° 9 dance with the ever-developing findings of science. if not it may be uncovered by human beings. Only if his mind is poisoned by prejudice can he fall into error”.15 At the heart of this optimism is the presupposition that truth is manifest. on the other hand. He who reads it with a pure mind cannot misread it. episteme. Popper follows two streams in the development of the English and the European theories of knowledge and science. . is the anticipation of the mind. By following and contrasting these two. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is observation. by the most optimistic view of man’s power to discern truth and to acquire knowledge”. Conjectures and Refutations. Popper. True method is none other than the true reading or interpretation of Nature that leads to true knowledge. or superstition. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is the intellectual intuition of clear and distinct ideas. This very thought contributed to the birth of modern science. Conjectures and Refutations. for otherwise God would be deceiving us. which leads to doxa. The second stream is classical rationalism (Descartes). The Reformation and Renaissance in the fifteenth and sixteenth century brought about a certain “epistemological optimism. “Descartes based his optimistic epistemology on the important theory of the veritas Dei. False method. the truthfulness of Nature. The first stream of thought is classical empiricism (Bacon). Adriaanse’s work is part of this wider framework and his critique of classic theology is embedded in this kind of rationalism.120 Teoloãki åasopis. What we clearly and distinctly see to be true must indeed be true. or conjecture or hypothesis. Popper leads us to the fundamental understanding of modern theories of science.

i. Most historians of philosophy agree that humanity has gone from the ‘darkness’ of the Middle Ages to the ‘light’ of the Enlightenment and Modernity. in order to arrive at the unshakable basis of self-evident truth”. the senses and the intellect were the authorities. Thus we are split into a human part. 15. Popper elsewhere points out that this is none other than Kant’s principle of autonomy. and which has an almost divine authority over us”. Conjectures and Refutations. Conjectures and Refutations. the part which is the source of real knowledge (episteme). but it seems like the efforts of both Bacon and Descartes are an attack on prejudice and naiveté. and a super-human part. all humans have the source of knowledge in them. we ourselves. 7. of our errors and of our ignorance. remains essentially a religious doctrine in which the source of knowledge is divine authority”. Popper critically concludes: “We can see more clearly why this epistemology. Popper. Popper. which seemed to function. the part which is the source of our fallible opinions (doxa).17 Both Bacon and Descartes agree that there is no need to appeal to a higher authority. 17 18 19 20 Popper.e. Popper. But in doing so they split man into two parts…. Conjectures and Refutations.20 At stake here is the freedom of man to think. Popper’s critical analysis shows that “Descartes’ method of systematic doubt is also fundamentally the same (as that of Bacon): it is a method of destroying all false prejudices of the mind.17. in Popper’s opinion. such as the senses or the intellect.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 121 fest”. 19 New authorities have been erected: instead of Aristotle and the Bible.18 It may be somewhat strong to suggest. Conjectures and Refutations. anti-authoritarianism. 15. However. as divine authorities. not only in Descartes but also in Bacon’s form. and they set them up within each individual man. . Popper raises the critical question of whether they truly managed to rid themselves of their dependency on authority for their optimistic epistemologies. “Bacon and Descartes set up observation and reason as new authorities.

as the most prolific figure of this period. but to lack of courage or determination to use one’s own intelligence without the help of a leader. Kant. Where Bacon and Descartes were cautious.122 Teoloãki åasopis. 175. Kant’s work provided the intellectual backbone for the new era on the European continent. 178. The first step is the clear definition of the limits of knowledge. Popper outlines two basic steps in the work of Kant. Popper. Popper places the significance of Kant’s oeuvre alongside the American and French revolutions. The kind of rationalism that has been defining the European mind-set. is the one who systematized the achievements of classical empiricism by declaring the independence of ‘pure reason’ in his major work. N° 9 We understand this as humanity’s struggle for independent thinking. The contribution of this ‘rebellion’ was and still is the affirmation of the autonomous human being as the ultimate and true agent of knowledge.”22 Kant’s definition clearly summarizes the basic program of the Enlightenment: the freedom of the individual human beings to think and to define reality for themselves. Sapere aude! Dare to use your own intelligence. Popper’s analysis of Kant starts with a quote from Kant on the definition of Enlightenment: “[it is] the emancipation of man from a state of self-imposed tutelage… of the incapacity to use his own intelligence without external guidance. Conjectures and Refutations. A step beyond classical empiricism and rationalism is Popper’s treatment of the Enlightenment. the Critique of Pure Reason. Nature or God. If it is a knowl21 22 Popper. Conjectures and Refutations. Kant made the next step. This is the battle-cry of the Enlightenment. Such a state of tutelage I call ‘self-imposed’ if it is due. the last couple of centuries. a step towards the liberation of the human intellect from any outside agency. not to lack of intelligence.21 The student of theology who wants to understand the shape of modern theology has to take into consideration the impact Kant’s thinking has had. has had a major influence on contemporary theology. It is thinking without being conditioned by outside authorities. .

but imposes its laws upon nature’”. Popper also notes that “in Kant’s own striking formulation of this view ‘our intellect does not draw its laws from nature.25 Within the parameters of the Kantian understanding of Ethics. however. however exalted.the doctrine that we cannot accept the command of an authority. 180. be applied to ordinary physical things and events. He asserted that “our ideas of space and time are inapplicable to the universe as a whole”23.24 In other words. Beyond that. then the critical question is how far can that kind of knowledge or intellect reach? To answer the question one must look into Kant’s relevant ideas on time and space. Popper. The theory of the free thinking human being crystallizes most evidently in Kant’s ethics. but that the human being himself is the one who is the judge of the truth of an ethical demand. Human knowledge thus cannot reach beyond what is given in the world. 181. Popper explains “Kant wrote his Critique in order to establish that the limits of sense experience are the limits of all sound reasoning about the world”. In Kant’s critique of religion. but only in the human intellect. we see even more clearly the relevance of the above overview. there is no certain knowledge only speculation. Conjectures and Refutations.e. because they precede Kant’s critique of religion. the human being becomes a free agent. in Popper’s analysis. Conjectures and Refutations. …The doctrine of autonomy . but an inductive knowledge. projection. this means that there is no outside authority. is the humanization of knowledge. Since knowledge is not found ‘out there’. Kant turns the whole Cartesian understanding of the method of knowledge on its head. Popper’s survey of Kant and the two steps are important. as the ultimate basis of ethics”. Conjectures and Refutations. The limits of the human intellect are determined by time and space. They can. Popper. “Kant humanized ethics. 179. . It is not a deductive knowledge anymore. i. Kant’s second step. Popper observes the following. Since the Middle Age there has been a gradual move towards the in23 24 25 Popper. as he had humanized science.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 123 edge freed from ‘authorities’.

and to worship Him”. Through Popper’s review of the main tendencies in the philosophy of science we come to clearly understand the ideological context in which Adriaanse poses his critique of classic theology. This self-actualization is one of the main factors which determine the context of twentieth century theology. knowledge and rationality. It is formulated more often as a question: how do you know what you know? In other words the certainty of knowledge had to be established in a rational way. in order to worship him as your creator. Kant provides the systematic basis on which this epistemological rationality rests.124 Teoloãki åasopis. who does not accept any ‘higher’ authority anymore. 182. N° 9 dependence of human consciousness and reason. Knowledge and Rationality The nineteenth and twentieth century theology is dominated by Descartes’s epistemological dictum ego cogito ergo sum. The free human being. . but projects his or her own God. Experience. In our view. We turn our attention now to Adriaanse’s conception of experience. Popper highlights the following words from Kant: “much as my words may startle you. Conjectures and Refutations. these are the key loci that hold Adriaanse’s argument together. The Enlightenment is the main paradigm which to a large extent defines contemporary scientific rationality. For in whatever way the Deity should be made known to you. it is you… who must judge whether you are permitted [by your conscience] to believe in Him. From the moral point of view… you even have to create your God. and even… if He should reveal Himself to you. 26 Popper.26 The freed human being has reached his/her own maturity by becoming the subject of his or her own history. you must not condemn me for saying: every man created his God. They are foundational to his critique of classic theology and his theory of religious education. is at the heart of modern theology. Adriaanse’s critique of classic theology in rooted in this rationality.

1988) 7. From the perspective of the receiver: in the act of revelation. the recipient (D) gains an insight (E). In what follows. (Kampen: Kok. 4 . Rationality.27 The usual theological locus where the issues related to experience. it becomes clear how Adriaanse thinks about the issues related to theological method and theological rationality.. From the perspective of: the author (A). knowledge and rationality are discussed is the prolegomena of a theological work. of a certain Gehalt (C) (content). But before we engage with Adriaanse’s problematisation of revelation. specifically to the various theories of knowledge.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 125 We have already noted that theology did not develop in a vacuum. C. is not only about the “how”. The predominant discussions in theology related to revelation are focused on the possibilities (or impossibilities) of what may 27 Adriaanse. Revelation as a theological locus is foundational for all systematic theologies. we will trace in Adriaanse’s work what he sees as the dominant factors on the field of experience.. for Adriaanse. in the revelatory situation (B). II Religionphilosophisch” (RGG /VI) 464-467.28 The formal structure of revelation may be approached from on the one hand from the perspective of the author and on the other from the perspective of the recipient of revelation. knowledge and rationality. who reveals himself in situation (B) in its Gehalt (C) (content) for the recipient (D) with the effect (E). He takes one step further and explores the possibilities and the validity of knowledge. H. In the problematisation of revelation. or the methodology of knowledge. “Offenbarung.J. we want to present a common understanding of revelation in its formal and theological definitions. Theologically speaking we are dealing with Adriaanse’s theory of revelation. but struggled to adapt itself to the demands of science. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen. from the author of revelation (A). It is the place where theologians have to come to terms with the presuppositions of their theology in relation to the demands of the scientific theory. 28 Schwöbel.

if there is any. and at the same time. At stake here is the following critical question: what happens between the sender and the receiver in the act of revelation? What does the receiver ‘get’ or what does he come to know from or about the sender? Or to ask the same question differently: what is the difference. between reason and ‘otherworldly’ or ‘received’ knowledge? It is often assumed that the kind of knowledge that revelation provides and the nature of human reason are mutually exclusive. The recipient of the revelation (D) understands his life situation (B) as brought to light by this act of revelation. when revelation is seen as an act of self disclosure of God. (in Christ-atoned). yes there is correlation between God and humans in the act of revelation. however through the raising of the Crucified One his will for communion with. the almighty Creator (A). However. and enables its execution (E). in the apostle’s life situation marked by the apparent failure of the mission of Jesus (B).126 Teoloãki åasopis. The dawn of the Enlightenment went beyond this and brought this traditional relationship of revelation and reason into a problematic relationship. makes the truth of the message certain. this is how the formal structure translates: Israel’s God. There was an obvious correlation between human intellect and divinely revealed knowledge. In a nutshell. His will and His character. manifests His character as Truthful Love (C). In the Middle Age. and through which he enables life in faith as life in the certainty of truth (E). the presuppositions were more optimistic about the relationship between revelation and reason. then what is the . Secondly. this is the main challenge: can there be any genuine correlation between humans and God? The answer to this challenging question is twofold. It is apparent from this definition that God is the author (A) of the revelatory act. Thus God is not the projection of the human mind but the subject of revelation. His creatures. In theological terms. is the content of revelation (C). through which he gives certainty about the truth to those who listen to this message (D). Theologically revelation implies the disclosure of God to humans. N° 9 or may not happen between the author and the recipient of the revelation. since the Reformation the focus has shifted mainly towards reason as the place of revelation. reveals Himself. Firstly.

God.. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. So talk of the ‘beyond’ does not have the character of time and space. Finite humans are confined to time and space (classic Kantianism) and therefore they cannot reach beyond what is given in time and space. Barth on the other hand sought to reaffirm the otherness of God and thus distinguished the subjectivity of human consciousness from the objectivity of God. vol I.[reprint of the 1831 ed. (Berlin: De Gruyter. These theological and philosophical considerations are at the basis of Adriaanse’s rejection of the classic understanding of revelation. By consequence the line blurred between God and humans. Furthermore this means that the possibility of conceiving God as an entity on its own is impossible.D. K. and therefore 29 Schleiermacher. F. 2003). (Zürich: EVZ-Verlag. . 30 Barth. Schleiermacher sought to define revelation in terms of the human consciousness as “the feeling of absolute dependence”. 1932-1938). There was no distinct subject and object relationship. His assumption is that there is no correlation between God and human beings. but only the thinking and feeling of human beings. Barth’s conclusion was then that without revelation there is no correlation possible whatsoever between God and humans. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik. Both theologians answered these questions in their own way. One of the most significant examples of these issues is the discussions about the theologies of Schleiermacher and Barth.E.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 127 human faculty that receives this act? In other words: when God reveals himself where does revelation land in the human consciousness? These critical questions shed light on the problems of human rationality and the knowledge of God. As the recipient of revelation humans are unable to think of or know God.30 Barth in a certain sense refused to locate the act of revelation in the human..29 thus identifying the human intellect and emotion as place where the revelation of God landed. ‘God’ is a product of human consciousness and it is ultimately bound to it.]. He rather focused on the true subject of revelation.

according to which he proposes that all theological work and talk of God ought to be measured by. public. It is not a private matter. So what is a scientific theory? Adriaanse uses the following definition to identify a scientific theory: it is a sys31 Trans.e. . The question which Adriaanse seems to be positing is this: regardless of whether revelation is possible or not. So far our study has introduced the rationale of Adriaanse’s arguments. A Theory of Scientific Method Now we have arrived at the point where we can look in more detail at Adriaanse’s systematic formulation of the theory of scientific knowledge.128 Teoloãki åasopis. We have to examine at this point the two aspects of the scientific method Adriaanse proposes. Here we have to make an important remark: he often defines science as an openbare31 discipline. We will continue with the systematic formulation of Adriaanse’s theory of knowledge and scientific method. This will help us to understand Adriaanse’s objections against classic theology. This is precisely the core of Adriaanse’s argument for the impossibility of the rationality of classic theology. The heart of the problem is not so much the initial experience of God. as widely accessible as possible. meaning that science in its entirety is an open matter and accessible for everyone who engages in it. or even talk about what has happened and what has been experienced? The problem of rational justification is the main point of criticism Adriaanse poses to theology. we have to see how Adriaanse defines a scientific theory. i. but the more significant issue of the talk about God or the act of rationalization and coherent speaking about what one has experienced and what has been revealed. First. reception of the revelation. can one still rationally justify. N° 9 one cannot rationally justify God talk. because it ought to be present on the public square.

they must be a well defined part of it. and preferably non-contradictory in nature. there is also the how of scientific theories.. they have to demark the specific area which they are about to address. Leertouwer.32 It is a rational system of thought and definitions. Krop. 1987) 54-56. c) Empirical adequacy – There must be sensory experiences which can be correlated with a specific theory. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie. in other words. only with a part of it. taste. and particularly not contradictory statements.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 129 tem of thoughts and definitions. 32 Adriaanse. one should be able to see. Science is not supposed to concern itself with the totality of all there is. about a concrete part of reality that is formulated in such a way that it is possible to deduce examinable theories from it. d) Accuracy – The hypotheses which come from a certain theory must be confirmed by facts. L.A. Scientific theories cannot refer to reality as a whole.. What are the right steps towards developing a scientific theory? Or what are the right conditions that make scientific theories possible? Adriaanse lists five conditions that determine how a scientific theory must work: a) Precision – It has to be clearly stated which part of reality one is attempting to describe. b) Consistency – there should not be any contradiction within the whole of the argument. H. These definitions have to refer to a concrete part of reality. This point strongly connects to point ‘c’. H. Second. Finally. measure and so on.J. as accurate as possible. rather. (Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom. . Since theories are claims about reality.. logical consistency is required in the formulation of a coherent theory. scientific theories must be verifiable. touch. Het verschijnsel theologie. scientific theories cannot be about the whole of reality.

These methodological considerations bring us to our next point. Adriaanse asks: Is theology possible in the present context of the scientific demands in a university? And if so. Adriaanse. N° 9 e) General acceptance of presuppositions – every scientific theory works with a certain accepted presupposition (as in historical studies. repeatability is not possible. Or in theological terms: God cannot be 33 Adriaanse. in the field of humanities and in studies such as history. However.130 Teoloãki åasopis. what are those possibilities? The Impossibility of Theology Earlier we have presented our definition of theology. This search is in actuality about the possibility of theology in an age of science. By examining Adriaanse’s criticism of theology we submit our definition to be tested. Repeatability is much more relevant for the natural sciences. A scientific phenomenon ought to be repeatable at all times with the same exact results. one might come across one more point. which Adriaanse omits from his own system and that is repeatability. The reason is that. When events happen only once. goes further in search of a so called scientific theology. Het verschijnsel theologie. We have argued that in its strictest sense theology is talk about God and specifically talk about the identity of God. the task of the historian is to recover with as much accuracy as possible what has happened. Therefore Adriaanse is not concerned with this aspect of the scientific theory. To formulate this in a question. Adriaanse criticizes precisely this understanding by posing the critical question: what can publicly. according to classic theology God makes Himself known. . 54-56. having established what science and adequate scientific theories are. 33 In other definitions of scientific theories. in the sense which is universally valid. one assumes that he or she may know the past). be said about God? In other words: what can be scientifically asserted about God? His answer is that there is nothing to be said about God in a scientific way.

1981). t. red.g.. E. We already have seen the five conditions necessary to establish a theory as scientific. 9.v. Verdonk. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz. en uitgeg.35 Another critical point Adriaanse makes is that because classic theology is talk about God. H. F. We want to understand the arguments Adriaanse presents and the way he applies the above definition and conditions of scientific theory to classic theology. rijksuniversiteit. 36 Het Het specifiek specifiek theologische theologische aan aan een een Berkhof. H.15. .36 This very objectification of God is impossible. rijksuniversiteit.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 131 known unless He revels Himself. dr. 35 Adriaanse. The main question here is: how does classical theology measure up to the demands of modern scientific theories? The answer is: 34 Adriaanse. These are two critical reasons why Adriaanse considers classic theology as being not scientific. according to Adriaanse. E.O.34 Revelation. van Gennep en W. is not in any way public and therefore the irreconcilable difference remains between the practice of public science and the talk of God. how God is the object (voorwerp) of the study of theology. The next step is to put classic theology against these conditions. zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden . Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof. Here Berkhof talks in more detail about. Flesseman-van Leer. Classic Theology and the Demands of the Modern Scientific Method Adriaanse analyses theology by measuring its scientific merit. God is the object of theology. (Nijkerk: Callenbach.

is able to measure up to the standards of modern science. 2) Consistency – essentially consistency is possible in classical theological theories. Where does this leave classic theology? What 37 Science deals with all that is in the world and not with the world itself. in today’s understanding of science all theories are developed from the vantage point. considering issues related to theodicy (e. They are theoretical in character thus miss empirical adequacy. This is the reason why theology has to be classified as a pseudo-science.e. Theology cannot pretend to deal with reality as a whole. namely consistency. 5) General acceptance of presuppositions – the presupposition which all classical theologies share is that there is a God. Het verschijnsel theologie. the condition for accuracy is also impossible.38 The conclusion of the above considerations is that theology only on one point. 57-63. or presupposition of atheism. in reality it is much harder. God and the world as creation37) it does not correspond to the condition of scientific precision.g. which is needed. 3) Empirical adequacy – is clearly impossible for the statements about God. However. however. The critical question is often asked here of how can one talk about something one has not seen? 4) Accuracy – based on the above empirical in-adequacy.132 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 1) Precision – because classical theology deals with the totality of reality (i. evil is hard to explain consistently). then why is there evil? Good vs. if God created the world good. Therefore Adriaanse’s argument establishes the following: classic theology does not correspond to the demands of a scientific theory therefore is not considered to be a scientific discipline. it ought to focus on a specific point of reality. 38 Adriaanse. .

’ Here ‘God’ means a conceptual entity of the human . probably the most important point for our work: talk of God in a university setting is deemed impossible. The partial conclusion is this: classical theology when measured by the standards of science is no science. if there is nothing to be said about God as such? Adriaanse is not about to discard theology. redefinition and affirmation of theology we call a living discipline. which in turn has an effect on its methodology and content. This constant growth. but only about ‘God. in order to be able to maintain any standing. Theology thus. it loses its position as one of the sciences in the universities. From the vantage point of the scientific method and philosophy of science theology as a discipline faces one the most critical challenges of our time. it has to fall under general religious studies. Here we understand the word ‘God’ to mean an entity in itself who can be experienced in his revelation in time and space. as understood in the classical sense. The question is: what is the way forward. In modern times. This is what it comes down to eventually: the complete loss of the talk of God. adaptation. It is a challenge that goes right to the heart of what theology is. Historically. We also have in mind the reformers who in the context of the church developed and reformed theology. God. Second. he qualifies its object.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 133 are the consequences? First. one can trace the development of theology through the ages and come to the conclusion that it is a living discipline. because by its method and content it only provides pseudo-knowledge. It has always sought to define itself on its own and in the context in which it was practiced. is in a situation of crisis. And third. The Complete Loss of the “Talk of God” The implication of the above argumentation is that scientifically there is nothing to be said about God. We think here of the early church fathers who did theology in the context of various competing philosophies and theologies. theologians are faced with the same kind of challenges. Adriaanse through his critique addresses this very challenge. This is ultimately what it means the loss talk of God in theology. rather. He suggests that the theologian cannot talk about God. presented by the scientific developments.

Since 1876. It is a shift from theology to anthropology. As one might expect classic theology is only taught in faculties which are affiliated with a specific church and denomination. religious science has found its home in cultural studies. the public universities function as duplex ordo. has moved from its dominant and privileged position into being considered. After Schleiermacher and Feuerbach religion is understood to be the deepest longing of human beings. during this century. where religion is researched as a cultural phenomenon. to the subject. one can only ask about religion. The general tension between religious science and theology remains.’ Thus. Het verschijnsel theologie. church history under the general department of history. practical and pastoral theory under psychology and-so-forth. which means that there is a separation between public universities and church theology. has had a political and administrative influence on the organization of the public universities and their faculties in the Netherlands. Christianity. N° 9 mind. also finds its roots in this age. This often causes uneasiness for theologians trying to find their way in this new constellation of sciences. Since the Enlightenment. all that remains is talk of human religiosity. . scientifically. one religion among other religions. In the public faculties religious science is increasingly taught of as part of the greater humanities. 63. The theologian has to talk about ‘God’ only in terms of what human beings think about ‘God. Therefore the object of research is the religious human subject. This turn. closely related to religious science.’ Therefore. meaning the human attitude towards ‘God.134 Teoloãki åasopis. Here classic subjects such as exegesis come under the department of arts. Religious studies and science is a fairly recent development in the field of sociology and cultural anthropology. the ultimate object of theology is not God but the human beings who talk about ‘God.’39 When ‘talk of God’ is lost. This is a significant move. This kind of organization has led to the decentralization of theology and to the compartmentalization of the various theological disciplines. Religious philosophy. Religious philosophy is 39 Adriaanse.

In philosophical terms.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 135 not about showing the truth of one religion against the other. Adriaanse. meaning a ‘God’ as talked about by people. The focus. in theology.40 We previously have seen what the loss of the ‘talk of God’ entails as meant by Adriaanse. . Het verschijnsel theologie. as is the case with dogmatics. Theology in this sense is about religion. By consequence it is religious anthropology. i.41 Adriaanse then concludes that the scientific character of religious science can be maintained as long as there is a clear demarcation from classic theology. This might seem speculative in nature but it is a real differentiation. rather. The quotation marks have a very specific purpose in defining the division. Religion understood as an expression of a whole range of human projections on ‘God’. Conclusion The working thesis of our study is that theology fundamentally is talk about God and more specifically talk about the identity of 40 41 42 Adriaanse.73. Het verschijnsel theologie. 63. seen or talked about as an entity of its own reality. a divinity. is no longer on the Theos but on the human being. This in turn begs the question: How does one talk about God in a publicly responsible way? The short answer to this question according to Adriaanse is religious science. this move is a move from metaphysics to religious and cultural anthropology. Adriaanse further develops the following differentiation to show the essential divergence between religious science and theology: Theology must be about ‘God’. Only the human word about ‘God’ is the object of research and science. is impossible. Adriaanse. it presents and explains religion as a universal human possibility. 89-96. God. Het verschijnsel theologie.42 This demarcation has to be maintained as strictly as possible.e. Only a human definition of ‘God’ is valid matter to study for the theologian or the scientist of religion.

Then it considers this God inaccessible and impossible to talk about Him. but we talk about God who is present in His acting in the history of His people. To answer Adriaanse’s challenge. which is .136 Teoloãki åasopis. Exactly those developments are problematic when it comes to theology and specifically to God talk. The identity of God substantiates what we understand by the word ‘God’. One can only talk about ‘God’ as a concept. Modern scientific theory works with a definition of God as a metaphysical transcendent being. By using the term ‘identity’. which is other than the paradigm of God talk in Israel and the Church. we point toward a dynamic understanding of the word ‘God’. as such. Our main argument against Adriaanse is that we do not talk about God as the one who is above the line unrelated to His presence. is a metaphysical matter and thus not open for public inquiry. considering the scientific developments of the last two centuries. He argues that. is impossible. Therefore Adriaanse calls for the abandonment of theology and proposes ‘religious studies’ as a more ‘scientific’ alternative. Essentially.J. we can say that we understand that there might be difficulties considering the scientific developments of the last century. is a non-academic discipline. The reason is that God. We have submitted our thesis to the test in light of the religious scientific critique of theology. It was meant to compare theology to the scientific demands for an academic discipline. what we were dealing with is the understanding of the word ‘God’. His conclusion is: theology considered from a scientific perspective. Adriaanse’s work was the guideline for discussing the matters related to the test. Adriaanse has a concept of God. H. which is intrinsically related to human religious consciousness and the human ability to project a higher being. theology defined as talk about God. We formulated Adriaanse’s challenge in the following question: does theology deserve the adjective ‘academic’? Is there a kind of God talk that is justified or at least plausible for such an academic discourse? Considering the main narrative texts of our theological tradition (the basic texts in the Bible) and the long and rich history of God talk. N° 9 God. Adriaanse in his criticism of classic theology focuses on the wrong God. there is no reason why theology ought not to be an academic discipline.

That is the reason why he opts for understanding the word ‘God’ as a human projection. The word ‘God’. YHWH. address. which means that He is free to be and act according to His own will. Time and time again we hear the motto: YHWH is God and not the idols. It is by grace that He enters . YHWH does not conform to the ideals of His people. The Shema. We understand that theology pertains to this God. God has an identity and is not merely a definition. The Name. When we talk about God we talk about YHWH. He does so not outside the perceived reality but in the reality of their lives. Theologians through the ages have struggled with this very issue. His people’s history is His history as well. qualifies the meaning of the word ‘God’. therefore He does not fit any philosophical system or rationality that tries to domesticate Him according to its own rules. ultimately emanates from the religious imagination of humans. Adriaanse’s criticism of theology pertains exactly to this ‘God’. God talk.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 137 fundamentally defined by the Name of God. namely to show that the identity of God is decisive for their respective theologies. He does things like saving people. He is not to be manipulated nor used for their purposes. i. the biblical narratives about YHWH. i. The way we understand the word ‘God’ is the way biblical narratives identify God. The way we talk about God is neither the theoretical ‘God’ of philosophy nor a God who is only proclaimed in the Word. one of the most basic and important confession of Israel. It is not a constructed understanding of the word. acts and moves. where God is defined as a high being which exists outside the reality we experience as human beings. in their history. and relates to them so much that there is talk of a marriage between God and His people.e. is a reminder of this very truth. Through those narratives God exists as a separate entity who talks. theologically speaking.e. This is precisely the problem. They have to live with the knowledge that their God is God. He understands classic theology as being about a constructed ‘God’. judging people and restoring them. talks to them. He appears to people. He does not simply exist: He acts. there He is as well. The biblical narratives identify God as a person who gives His Name and where His Name is called upon. for Adriaanse. but the God who is identified in the history of His people.

The history of Israel. touched and defined by this God. N° 9 into the vulnerable covenantal bond with them. is YHWH’s history in their interrelated identities. would be to ignore these texts and what they say about God. Biblical theology shows the way of talking about God and His identity and also that to whom God speaks become the carriers of His presence in this world. The nature of the texts and their content puts us into a position where we can affirm that theology is indeed talk about God in a specific way about His identity. as the cumulative experiences of those whose lives have been addressed. Therefore we see no reason why theologians should abandon theology as God talk. by being in relationship they are one. Even though they are two different people. Just like a married couple. . as not being God talk. YWHW. attaches His identity to them. but we who have heard also talk about God.138 Teoloãki åasopis. We have made it plausible that in biblical theology there is no indication why theology should be seen anything less than talk about God as He indentified Himself in the history of His people. by participating in the lives of His people. This is the reason why knowing God is not a matter of epistemology but of history. which tell of God and who He is. So there is a concrete place where not only God speaks. the participants become one and share the same history. humanity and the world. To follow Adriaanse and denounce theology. The texts give voice to those human experiences.

Kampen: Kok. F. Anselm. Charlesworth. E. with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo. Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie.J. en uitgeg. 1987. New Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans. dr. L. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik. Flesseman-van Leer. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen. A. E.. K. Beek van de. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie.O.. Nijkerk: Callenbach. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz. H. t. K. Oxford: Clarendon Press. . Adriaanse. Barth. 1982.A. 1988. trans.v. Verdonk..J. red. Proslogion: 1965.. van Gennep en W.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 139 Bibliography Adriaanse. Zürich: EVZ-Verlag.g. zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden . vol I. Berkhof.J. 2002. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof. 1932-1938 Edition. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. H.. Krop. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982. Leertouwer.... God kennen – met God leven. Barth. H. 1981. H. Het verschijnsel theologie. H. Nijkerk: Callenbach. Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom. M.

McGrath.R.. Kampen: Kok.140 Teoloãki åasopis. Christelijk Geloof.. N° 9 Berkhof.) Karl Popper. Grenz. Theology for the Community of God. A. Jenson. London: Routledge.].. R. An Introduction. The Triune God.1.. H. Oxford: Blackwell. F. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. 2nd Ed. 1. 2004..D. 1997. A.E.. C. vol. 2000. Schleiermacher. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. 1963. 2003.. “Offenbarung. Berlin: De Gruyter. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. Popper. Christian Theology. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Conjectures and Refutations. 2002. London: Routledge. 8e druk. J... [reprint of the 1831 ed. O’Hear. Schwöbel. K. S. vol. 1997. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Systematic Theology. (ed.E.W. II Religionphilosophisch” RGG4 /VI .

Evangelical believers do not fit in any of the main people groups because the main criterion for belonging to a group is religious background. reconciliation in itself is not an intentional objective of the church. Identity and Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar Abstract: Religion is seen by many as one of the main causes of the conflict between people in the Balkans. This article discusses reconciliation in the Evangelical church in Mostar.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 141 UDK 284. The Evangelical church is therefore a neutral place where people with different ethnic identities can meet each other. However. there are religious groups that can contribute to the peace-building efforts. Key words: Religion. Mostar. One. This church plays an interesting role in a society that is characterised by clearly divided groups.6Mostar) Praying on the Front-Line Religion. therefore would not expect religion to play a positive role in the process of reconciliation between Islamic Bosnian Muslims and Catholic Bosnian Croats. Conflict. Peace-building. Religious Anthropology. Identity.991(497. . Reconciliation. In a post-war city like Mostar in Bosnia and Hercegovina religious identity is one of the main markers of division between different groups. This can serve as a first step in the process of reconciling conflicting groups. However. Bosnia and Hercegovina. Ethnicity. Evangelical Church.

when I specifically intend to say something about the Bosnian.142 Teoloãki åasopis. a monument for unity had been erected in Mostar. The main subject of this article is the role of reconciliation between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. N° 9 Introduction Ten years after the violent ethnic conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina1 came to an end. The terrorist attacks on New York. The argument for choosing Bruce Lee is that he is worshipped by Muslims. Strangely enough the symbol for unity is a statue of kung fu legend Bruce Lee. The constant threat of attacks in all major cities in Europe has its impact 1 In the English literature the term Bosnia is normally used for the country as a whole. see themselves as Herzegovinians rather than Bosnians. This subject is relevant to many people for several reasons. I will mainly use the abbreviation BiH throughout this article. I do not want to deny the contribution of religion to the conflict. where I did my research. Serbs and Croats alike (Zaitchik. 2006). People from Herzegovina. I will make it explicit. However. Instead of using the full name of the state: Bosnia and Herzegovina. The first reason is related to the current global political situation. At first sight this subject may seem contradictory in itself. The tension between Islamic cultures and the western world is still in the news on a daily basis. Religion and religious groups in the Balkans are usually associated with conflict rather than with reconciliation. Madrid and London almost ten years ago have shocked the world. . or the Herzegovinian part of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The statue showed Lee in a typical fighting pose. but my primary focus in this article is on the contribution of religion and religious groups to the reconciliation process. This peculiar choice shows how hard it is to find a suitable symbol for unity in the complex situation of this country. A lot of attention has been given to the way religion was used as justification of violence in the war at the end of the 20<^th century in former Yugoslavia. It may seem strange to look for reconciliation in a religious group.

into a symbol of cultural and religious conflict. This act of destruction changed what had. The central question in this article is ‘What is the role of the reconciliation process between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar?’ My focus is on reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. In 1993 the old Ottoman bridge of Mostar was destroyed before the eyes of the world. I think it is impossible to draw . been a symbol of religious and cultural tolerance. It is hard to define the boundaries of an Evangelical Church. The rebuilding of the bridge has accordingly become a symbol of reconciliation. It is not my objective to define who is a true evangelical and who is not. In the church where I did my research. Terrorist attacks throughout the world raise questions about religious and cultural tolerance and the way ethno-religious groups can live alongside each other. With this article I hope to contribute to this discussion. I have chosen to do my research in a small church. When I write about the Evangelical Church I mean the group of people that comes to activities organised by the church on a regular basis . this subject is also relevant to those working for grass roots organisations doing peace building.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 143 on the debate about pluralistic and multi-ethnic societies. Cities like Sarajevo and Mostar have a long history of dealing with different religions and cultures within its boundaries. no defined membership exists. either in the Balkans or anywhere else in the world. Reconciliation is one of the main objectives of many humanitarian organisations There is a lot of discussion about the possible strategies that can be used to achieve reconciliation. For centuries the Balkans have been the bridge between Christian and Islamic culture. for centuries. Although the context in BiH is different from most other places in the world. though I am fully aware that this study is a mere starting point. the debate about the Bosnian conflict between Muslims and Christians speaks into the debates about this same conflict in other parts of the world. The specific context of the Evangelical Church in Mostar naturally makes it hard to generalise any conclusions. Apart from the topicality of religion and reconciliation on a global scale.

five sub-questions need to be looked at.144 Teoloãki åasopis. Churches differ from place to place and the church in Mostar differs in many ways from a church in Amsterdam or even in Sarajevo. In order to be able to draw any conclusions on a reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church. Reconciliation can have a comparable role in various contexts. N° 9 conclusions about the role of reconciliation in churches in general. The role of reconciliation in a church is very dependent on the specific circumstances. the answers to my questions are based on the specific situation of the conducted research. Nevertheless. • How do people in Mostar in general construct their identity? • How do evangelical Christians in Mostar construct their identity? • What role does ethnicity play in the church? • What kind of relationships do evangelical Christians from different ethnic backgrounds have in Mostar? • In what way does the Evangelical Church actively support reconciliation? . This does not mean that my findings are of no value for any other context.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

145

Conceptual Framework
Some of the concepts that have been used in this article could be confusing and their boundaries need to be defined. A first concept that needs clarification is religion. The role of religion in the Balkan conflicts is often debated. For a good understanding of the role of religion and religious groups in the processes of both conflict and reconciliation, it is necessary to explain how I define religion in this context. There are many definitions of religion in use, but the discussion on the definition has two extremes2. On one of the spectrum scholars define religion by the function it has in society. From this functionalistic perspective religion is for example everything that is used to give man a higher purpose in life. The difficulty with definitions like this is that the existence of religion is explained by its function. Religion is in this way reduced to a human functional construct. On the other end of the spectrum are the scientists that use a substantial definition of religion. A famous example is Tylor’s definition. He states that ‘religion is the belief in spiritual beings’ (Lambek, 2002: 21). This definition comes close to the popular use of the word religion in common parlance. In this perspective there is hardly any attention for the function religion fulfils in society. The focus is on the substantial characteristics of religion. In theology this last approach to religion is more common. In the social sciences there is more attention on the functional aspects of religion. It is not surprising that most anthropologists use a more functional definition of religion, because anthropology has human behaviour in society as its object of study. In the analysis of processes of conflict and reconciliation in a religious group it makes sense to use a functional definition of religion. But I want to avoid giving the impression that I see religion as a human construct. In this article I give an anthropological perspective
2 I divide the definitions of religion in substantial and functional definitions following Berger (Berger 1967: 194). In the first appendix to The Sacred Canopy, Berger discusses the sociological definitions of religion.

146

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

and therefore my focus is unavoidably on the functional aspects of religion. Religion is part of the total framework of systems of meaning making that people use to define their position in reality. Religion can therefore be seen as a part of culture. Religion is that part of culture that is connected to the belief in a supernatural reality. A human being is capable of constructing religion and reshaping religion. On the other hand religion has impact on the way people think and act. It is therefore of crucial importance in the way people deal with issues of conflict and reconciliation. The second concept that needs some clarification is identity. Just like religion, the word identity is often used without a clarified meaning. Identity seems to be a fashionable topic and only a few decennia ago the concept was hardly ever used in the social sciences. Identity is becoming more important, because boundaries are becoming less clear. People have to find out who they are and to which group they belong. Identity says on the one hand something about the essence of a group or a person. On the other hand the concept has to do with the outside boundaries that separate one entity from another. Identity plays a role when clear boundaries are sought. When a group wants to distinguish itself from a different group, it will stress its identity. In this case identity has to do with difference. In other cases identity plays a binding role. The concept is then used to stress things that members of a group have in common. In this case identity has to do with similarity. These two aspects, difference and similarity, are central to identity. This shows why it is such a multifaceted concept. I define identity as the common aspects of a group that distinguish one group from others. It should be noted that every person has multiple identities and these change over time (Lifton 1995: 1-20). The boundaries of group identities run through groups that have a shared identity. Let me illustrate this with an example from Mostar. A Christian teenager who lives in West Mostar and comes from a Muslim background has multiple conflicting identities. He is young, ethnic Muslim, religiously Christian, West Mostarian, Herzegovinian etcetera. In different situations this person will stress different identities. In one situations he might focus on the characteristics he shares with certain

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

147

people and in different situations he might stress those things that distinguish him from these same people. In the complex situation where religion, nationality and ethnicity are all intertwined, identity plays a crucial role. When we look at conflict and reconciliation we have to take notion of the complex system of identities and the ways these are constructed. It has much impact on the way groups and individuals interact. In everyday use, identity is often regarded as something static. People have one identity and it never changes. It is important to realise that people think about identity in this way. The ideas that people have about identity have impact on the way they behave and these ideas form a part of the social reality that I study (Baumann, 1999: 81-96). There is no point in neglecting the existence of these ideas even though I think these ideas are based on a misunderstanding of identity. In the analysis of social developments in BiH it is impossible to neglect the concept of ethnicity. Ethnicity is a form of identity. It is the identity of a group that sees itself as being culturally distinctive from other groups. Eriksen points to the fact that for ethnicity to come about, groups must at least have some form of social contact (Eriksen, 2002: 12). Ethnicity is a relational concept and not the property of a group. A strong tendency exists throughout BiH to essentialise ethnicity and therefore people’s ethnic identities. According to most people a person is Croat, Serb or Muslim. Birth determines to which of these groups one belongs. Every group claims to have a separate origin and history. This essentialist understanding of ethnicity is for a great deal based on myths of clearly distinguishable people groups (Baumann, 1999: 65, 66). Dubious interpretations of history often form the basis for these ideas. An example of this is the conviction that exists throughout BiH about the history of the Bosnian Church during the Middle Ages. Many times during my fieldwork, people tried to convince me of the fact that their ancestors had been Bogomils. To them this was proof of the Bosnians not being Catholics like the Croats. The actual historical evidence for this assumption is minimal. Nevertheless, many Bosnian Muslims still believe this. For them it is part of the justification of an independent Bosnian state. This exemplifies how people interpret history to draw

148

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sharp boundaries between ethnic groups. These boundaries are quite problematic in BiH, because it is hard to distinguish Croats, Serbs and Muslims from each other. They all generally have the same appearance and until the war they spoke the same Serbo-Croatian language. The only clear difference is their religious conviction. and this difference is therefore strongly articulated. Religion is not only used to distinguish one from the other, it also serves as a moral justification for hatred towards the other group. Although I believe that this essentialist idea of ethnicity is based on questionable argumentations, I do believe it strongly influences developments in BiH and still continues to do so. It is interesting to see that ethnic groups in BiH point to their long separate histories, while at the same time differences are being created in the present. The separate languages, for example, are a recent phenomenon. As I have said earlier, people are being transformed by the systems of meaning making that they construct themselves.

Research Methods3
In order to find answers to the question under consideration I undertook anthropological research. The research methods I chose are typically for cultural anthropology. Most of my findings stem from the material I collected in fieldwork I did in the first half of 2005 in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. To find answers to the formulated questions I conducted qualitative research. This seemed the most suitable method to find answers to my questions. Relationships between people in a church can hardly be studied through surveys or other quantitative methods. Furthermore, many of my questions regard personal experiences. Building a relationship of trust is of crucial importance to achieve insight in people’s convictions. From February till June 2005 I stayed in Mostar and became part of the local Evangelical Church. Subsequently participant observation became my main
3 The research was part of my studies at the Social and Cultural Anthropology department of the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam.

This was a good way to speak with people about various matters. but also many informal activities like birthdays and barbecues. Most of them were aid workers and missionaries. The data obtained from interviews may perhaps be clear but less reliable. The big drawback of this is that the interview setting is somewhat unnatural. All names of informants in this article are fictitious. I have interviewed mostly young people and church leaders.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 149 research method. It was harder for me to get in contact with older women in church. Most of them had never heard of anthropology and had no clue what my research was about. creating confidential relationships is crucial for qualitative research. people regarded me as just another foreigner in church4. One advantage of interviewing over mere observation is that it produces very clear data. Next to participant observation I also used interviews as a research method. As I said. The older people in church are mostly women and. In the four months I spent in Mostar I successfully integrated in the church and created some good relationships. I visited many official church-activities like Sunday services. bible studies and worship meetings. 5 Drinking coffee and walking around in town are the main pastimes among the Mostarians. it was harder for me to get in contact with them. For me as a young man it was easiest to get in contact with young people and mostly with men. This has to do with the demographic composition of the church. youth meetings. I have tried to integrate into the church as much as possible. It was important to get to know people from the church also on a personal level. like I said before. relatively many foreigners came to church. Although the people in the church knew I was doing research. Therefore I spent a lot of time with people in smaller groups and one-on-one. drinking coffee or just walking on the street5. 4 Usually. .

One is labelled a Muslim or a Christian. further strengthen essentialist ideas.150 Teoloãki åasopis. It is assumed that all Muslims are alike and that it has always been like that. In BiH and in Mostar many people have an essentialist approach towards ethnicity. In his book ‘The Multicultural Riddle’ Baumann clearly shows how essentialist ideas have developed and what the results are: ‘Ethnicity and ethno-politics rely on rhetorics that trace cultural differences to biological differences. In this section I will discuss ethnic and religious identity. It is often via friends or family that people acquire a job or legal permission to start a business or build a house. The war has not only geographically divided Mostar in two. Together people form a network in which personal interests are looked after. they aim at purifying and canonizing the cultural essences that they have reified…’ (Baumann. One person helps building the house of his brother in exchange for another service. or the categorisation of people into strictly defined groups. and identity construction. 1999: 67). N° 9 Identity The war has turned Mostar into a divided city. Being part of a network offers people practical opportunities. In BiH this is more the case than in many Western countries. belonging to a network also provides a feeling of security. An essentialist approach of ethnicity and religion freezes the conflict between groups and it closes the gates for reconciliation. ethnicity and nationality are markers used to define one’s identity. This is not only the case among politicians but also among ordinary people. Apart from practical advantages. People feel safe in the street when they . I am aware of the danger of an essentialist approach. Identity politics. In the complex situation of Mostar essentialist ideas about ethnicity and religion are both present and problematic. Religions are often being divided along strict lines. These groups have formed strong and opposing identities. Religion. Religion is being essentialised in similar ways. Notions of belonging are of crucial significance to people in general and especially in Mostar. It also widened the gap between groups. A policeman will not fine one of his friends. Many Mostarians aspire to belong to clearly restricted groups.

Otherwise anthropological fieldwork would . When I asked a person about his ethnicity. is large in Mostar. this hope is reinforced by the affirmation of people around them. There is much variety within these categories and moreover they are constantly being transformed. I will separately discuss Croatian. Bringa states that her book ‘contains ethnographic data which are now history’ (Bringa. This way of discussing identity assumes an essentialist understanding of both ethnicity and religion. In her book ‘Being Muslims the Bosnian way’. but at the same time a person’s religion is determined by a one’s ethnicity. Children from mixed marriages. Nevertheless I will try to give a general picture of ethnic and religious identity in the way I encountered it in Mostar. Croatian culture. 1999: 85) Also Evangelical Christians do not really fit in one of the main categories in Mostar. refugees and displaced persons often have no clear idea about to which group they belong. Seeing ethnicity and religion as human constructs that show much diversity and change over time does not make them less real (Baumann. (Baumann. With all these exceptions it seems impossible to have an essentialist approach to religion or ethnicity in Mostar. It is impossible to give a definition of a Croat. Muslim and Evangelical identity. Religion defines a person’s ethnic group. on several occasions a people would answer: “I am a Christian”. Religion is for most people in Mostar the factor that determines to which group they belong. If a person for example believes in life after death. The amount of people that form an exception in some way or another. At the same time this is not easy in Mostar. Belonging to a group offers human security in precarious situations. 1999: 64). or ‘eccentrics’. Furthermore people feel supported in their convictions by others. or Croatian identity. The way Muslims perceived their religion before the war has totally been transformed by the war. but still many people do. Nationality and ethnicity are not very clear categories and many people are confused about the boundaries of categories.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 151 know that they are part of the same group as others. 1995: 198). I clearly want to acknowledge that both religion and ethnicity are mainly human constructs. The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for strongly attached groups. as Baumann calls them.

Everyone who visits Mostar for the first time is immediately confronted with the wounds of the war. The erected religious buildings form a conspicuous mark of the division. a person can at the same time be Mostarian. Serbs. Nearly all Serbs had fled the city. Bosnian Muslim and evangelical.152 Teoloãki åasopis. Constructing Identity in Mostar: Communal Factors A number of factors have significant influence on the way identity is being constructed in Mostar as a whole. Many destroyed buildings around the old front line form a visible scar. One cannot walk through Mostar without seeing this cross. The war has changed the face of Mostar beyond recognition. the east . My research population consisted of the evangelical community in Mostar. an enormous cross was erected in 2000. Minarets and the colossal church tower of one of the catholic cathedrals define the skyline of Mostar. In this section I will first discuss factors in identity construction in Mostar as a whole. West and East Mostar had been ethnically cleansed: The west side was almost totally Croatian. the surrounding region lacks much diversity. The region east of Mostar is a Serb dominated area. West of Mostar lives a vast Croat majority. Neither can one walk through Mostar without hearing the loud sound of the prayer call from the minarets’ speakers that are turned towards the west side of town. On the Hum Mountain south-west of Mostar. The people in the church were part of larger ethnic groups. so Mostar can be seen as a small scale BiH. Just like BiH reflects the complex mixture of peoples of the former Yugoslavia. The city has a long history of ethnic tolerance. and identity of evangelicals in Mostar. Different groups overlap here and people have multiple identities. It is important to realise that although Mostar had a very diverse population. N° 9 not make any sense. For example. Croats and Muslims managed to live in peaceful coexistence for a long period of time. After that I will discuss separately Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat identity.

There was not much left of the once so pretty town of Mostar. 106). but this was not much more than a formality. Schools on the west side have a curriculum that differs from east side schools. The city was turned into a depressive scene. Another important development in the reintegration process was the introduction in 1998 of one currency: the convertible mark (Bose. People from surrounding villages had taken their places (Bose. The same can be said of many institutions. The EUAM (European Union Administration of Mostar) had the difficult task of supervising the initial reconstruction and the reintegration of Mostar (Bose. 2002: 105. After the elections a local city council was formed with representatives from all ethnic groups. In practice the west and the east have separate police forces. Around the front-line all major buildings were ruined. At the same time a multi-ethnic police force was established. These elections were the first in BiH after the Dayton Agreements. In east side schools pupils learn Bosnian . Many young and educated people with opportunities had left Mostar and the country. although pupils can choose for ethics instead. One of them was the introduction of common license plates for cars so people could travel through the city freely. The character of the city had changed tremendously. 2002: 112). All bridges across the Neretva. 2002: 108). The representation was based on the pre-war demographic composition of Mostar. In June 1996 the first municipal elections were held in Mostar. Some important steps towards unification were taken in the first few years after the war. The return of refugees did not go as fast in the first years after the war in Mostar as elsewhere in the country. It breathed death and destruction. including ‘stari most’ were destroyed. In west side schools pupils learn Croatian language. Not much was left of the old Ottoman centre of town. An important element of division in Mostar is the educational system. Croatian history and have catholic religious classes. Citizens of Mostar voted strongly along nationalistic lines.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 153 side had become almost 100% Muslim. which function as separate bodies.

154

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

language6 Bosnian history and have Islamic religious classes. The gymnasium on Spanish Square in the centre of Mostar is the only school that uses curricula for both Muslims and Croats. This school is the pride of the international community, often given as an example of the success of reintegration Mostar. It is disappointing to see though that even here still classes are separated and that Croatian and Muslim children do not have much mutual contact. Mostar also has two universities, one on the east side and one on the west side. Between the two hardly any cooperation exists. East and West Mostar are marked by division and the two function in many ways as separate cities. Globalisation is another factor that has impact on identity in Mostar as a whole. In his book on globalisation and identity, Appadurai points to the effect of globalisation on, amongst others, BiH (Appadurai, 1999: 305-324). He substantiates that globalisation brings about insecurity in people’s ideas on what their identity is. Old divisions have become less strict and maintaining a specific local identity becomes harder due to the constant influx of information from other parts of the world. According to Appadurai the insecurity about people’s identity is one of the main driving forces behind the horrible violence that came to BiH in the war. Clear boundaries between groups have become more fluid as a result of globalisation. Another result of globalisation; the increase of recourses of information, causes a reverse dynamic. It is nowadays easier for a Muslim in Mostar to feel part of a global Muslim community, than it was 20 years ago. The same can be said of Catholics. Television and Internet enlarge knowledge and awareness of worldwide connections and antagonisms. The growing conflict between the Western world and the Islamic world cannot stay unnoticed in BiH and Mostar. The presence of a large group of foreigners is another factor that impacts identity construction in Mostar as a whole. The recon6 Bosnian and Croatian language are very much alike. Before the war all people in BiH spoke Serbo-Croat. Since the war separate languages exist, although the differences seem in many cases artificial.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

155

struction of BiH after the Dayton agreement attracted many international organisations. Chandler calls BiH the world’s capital of interventionism (Chandler, 1999: 2). People are more and more fed up with the aid of the international community, but at the same time the city became strongly dependent on this foreign aid. Without aid Mostar would turn into an administrative chaos. Reconstruction would stop and for example public transport would probably collapse7 The international community plays a dual role in people’s lives. This relationship of dependency and contempt with the international community also impacts the way Mostarians view themselves and others.

Bosnian Muslim Identity
As I have said earlier, it is difficult say anything about an ethnic group without falling into the pitfall of essentialism. One is inclined to use generalisations. An advantage of my research is that my informants are part of a group that does not seem to fit into any system of categorisation. The Bosnian Muslims form an exception in a predominantly Christian continent. The Bosnian Muslims also form an exception in the Islamic community. Religion is practised in a highly unorthodox way, especially because religion has been suppressed in the communist period. Muslims in the Middle East do not have much in common with Muslims in BiH. I did my fieldwork in an Evangelical Church. The Bosnian Muslims that are part of this church can be seen as an exception to an exceptional group, because although they see themselves as part of the Bosnian Muslim ethnic community, they themselves are Christians8 An oversimplified categorisation is hardly possible in this case. I will first try to give a rough
7 All buses in Mostar have a Japanese flag painted on the side, under which it says that the bus is financed by the Japanese government. 8

The vocabulary is confusing in this matter. Bosnian Muslims form first of all an ethnic category and not a religious category. For most people in this group Islam is used as the main marker in

156

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sketch of the Bosnian Muslim community of Mostar. After that I will describe the Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church. The town of Mostar has a population of about 100,000 people. Approximately half of the population consists of Bosnian Muslims. Although the Muslims of BiH can hardly be compared to Muslims in the Middle East or Turkey, there are many elements in Bosnian Muslim culture that one can trace back to the period of Ottoman occupation. The architecture of the old centre of Mostar and of the biggest part of the east bank differs from the architecture in West Mostar. The Muslim parts of town have small streets with many houses built close together. Some of the architecture has oriental elements. The most important piece of Ottoman architecture is of course the Old Bridge (Stari Most). In the small shops around the Old Bridge Turkish-like artefacts are being sold and Turkish coffee is being served in bars where people play tavla9 In this part of town you hear people say ‘alaikum’as a greeting to each other. Walking around in Mostar’s old town feels a bit like walking in an open-air museum. It does not give a very accurate picture of the everyday life of Bosnian Muslims. In most parts of town one cannot tell which person is a Muslim and which is not. The only Islamic law that is strictly observed is the probation to eat pork. Only a very small proportion of the women wear a head-scarf. The secular character of most Bosnian

their ethnic identity. I use the word term Bosnian Muslim also for those people this group who have converted to Christianity. In most literature the confusion is overcome by using the term Bosniak instead of Bosnian Muslim. This term is hardly ever used by any of my informants. Bosnian Muslims who converted to Christianity nevertheless see themselves mostly as belonging to the ethnic group of Bosnian Muslims. I have chosen to use this emic categorisation. Using the term Bosniak would oversimplify the matter. It is a mixed up reality, not only for the lay outsider, but also for many of my informants themselves.
9

A Turkish board game similar to backgammon.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

157

Muslims has to do with the suppression of religion during the communist period. For a long period of time Muslims were not recognised as an ethnic group of their own. Croats considered them converted Croats, Serbs saw them as converted Serbs. During the Yugoslav period there were no Islamic schools. Muslims from the cities differ in many ways from Muslims in the villages. Bringa shows that traditions play a stronger role in villages than in the cities (Bringa, 1995). A good example in her account is the fact that women change clothes when they go into town. In town they cannot wear their traditional clothes. Of course the situation has changed since Bringa did her research, but I do think that traditions are still much stronger in the villages than in towns like Mostar. In the last 15 years interest in Islam has grown in BiH. The first cause of this development lies in the war. The war hardened the borders between ethnic groups and as I stated before, religion is one of the main markers of difference between groups in BiH. Bosnian Muslim identity is articulated through a shared interest in Islam. A second reason why Islam is taken more seriously recently stems from the global conflict between the west and the Muslim world. People are forced to take sides in this debate. A third cause of the recent revival of Islam in BiH is the financial support that comes from Islamic countries and from Islamic communities in Europe. Throughout the country big mosques are being constructed with help of foreign funds. The Bosnian Muslims that I encountered do not have much interest in Islam. Most Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church consider themselves Christians. However, in many ways they feel part of the Bosnian Muslim community. Their focus is on East Mostar and they speak Bosnian instead of Croatian10 They go to Muslim schools, support FK Veleæ, (the east side football team) and are proud
10

There is not much difference between Bosnian and Croatian, but the small differences are important to people. If I want to buy bread in East Mostar I have to use a totally different word for bread then in West Mostar.

The television was always turned on very loud. The only big difference is that their religious identity is Christian. They received help from a humanitarian organisation that was connected to the Evangelical Church. Sometimes Boris was studying some kind of textbook about Christianity. One daughter has moved abroad where she got married to a former peace-force soldier. although nobody was really watching. His father was an Imam in Mostar and his grandparents owned much land in the vicinity of Mostar. Costs of living are not so high. N° 9 of the country of Bosnia and Herzegovina. During the war.158 Teoloãki åasopis. Boris’ father died when Boris was young. The daily pursuits consisted mainly of drinking Bosnian coffee and smoking. His parents were Partisans during the Second World War. Apparently the family lived on support from this daughter and from the church. According to Boris. Boris did not believe in Islam. It was his son who convinced him to come to church. He never prayed until he became a Christian and the only reason why he regarded himself as a Bosnian Muslim was that his father told him so. Mostar used to be the best city of the whole of Yugoslavia. The majority of their family and close friends are Bosnian Muslims. he is a middle-aged man who has been going to the Evangelical Church in Mostar for a few years. They also had a small plot of land where they grew some vegetables. Just after I left Mostar the oldest son started to look after some goats. Apart from daily meals and cigarettes they did not have much expenditure. Boris grew up in the old town of Mostar. whom she met in Mostar. He went to communist schools in Mostar and in Montenegro. They were kicked out of their house and moved in with his sister who is now also sometimes coming to church. Altogether it was just enough to get by. He became a Christian after the war. Neither Boris nor his wife had regular jobs. The house they lived in was only half finished. Although his father had been a religious leader. It seemed like the work on the first floor and the roof had stagnated a while ago. . he and his family lived in Mostar. A good example is Boris. His wife is also a Bosnian Muslim and she does not go to church. The Mostar he grew up in was a town where it did not matter what religious background one had. They lived in a small house with their two sons and two daughters and one grandson.

mainly through humanitarian aid. Catholicism is the most important marker of identity. They say that these Bosnian Croats are more Croatian than the Croats in Zagreb. Bosnian Croats are proud to be catholic and are in many ways devoted to the church. Every year thousands of Catholics from all over the world come to Medjugorje be- 11 Although Boris’ father had been an Imam.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 159 Boris’ situation is in many ways typical of most of the Bosnian Muslims that come to church. I do not think Islam played a significant role in his life. Most of them are relatively poor and came in contact with the church during the war or shortly after. Bosnian Croat Identity In Zagreb people make fun about the Bosnian Croats in Western Herzegovina. The red and white chequered flag hangs from almost every lamppost. Although they definitely consider themselves as Bosnian Muslims. I think this joke tells a lot about the way ethnic identity is being articulated by Bosnian Croats in Mostar. I have not met any Bosnian Muslims in church that were part of a family in which Islam played a very significant role11 It is striking that of the evangelical Bosnian Muslims only a small minority lives on the east side of Mostar. The town of Medjugorje is one of the world’s largest places of pilgrimage. The part of Herzegovina west of the Neretva River has been the cradle of hard-line Croatian nationalists. . His upbringing had been more communist than Islamic and his father died when Boris was still really young. It is also typical that he was not very religious before he became a Christian. The evangelical Bosnian Muslims cannot really be considered part of the core of this ethnic group. Even the smallest villages in this region have a Catholic church building. they have a marginal position in this community.

During my stay Pope John Paul II died. The 50. One of the highest Church towers in Europe has been built in Mostar and as I mentioned before the giant Cross on mount Hum is visible from every corner of town. most of the other economical activity is to be found in West Mostar. . This is visible from the cars that people drive and the clothes that people wear. Bosnian Croats seem to feel related more to Croatia than to BiH. Most of the Bosnian Croats that I interviewed for my re12 The work of Bax (Bax: 1995) provides an extensive anthropological analysis of the developments of the catholic regime in Medjugorje. Most of the streets are much wider and there are many big apartment blocks. This was reason for a lot of grief in West Mostar. Where East Mostar has many narrow streets. On a wall in West Mostar somebody has put this clearly into words with spray-paint: od is Croatian The architectural differences between West and East Mostar are striking. N° 9 cause of the supposed apparitions of Maria since 198112 In Mostar Catholicism also plays an important role in the expression of Croatian identity. Bosnian Croats celebrate this by driving around town waving Croatian flags. On the whole.160 Teoloãki åasopis. Although most tourist businesses are mainly centred in the old Ottoman part of town. Secularisation as in Western Europe seems nearly absent in present day Herzegovina. Faith is connected to the Croatian nation in a very direct way. at least among most Catholics. When there is a sports event the Bosnian Croats are always supporting the Croatian teams and when BiH looses a football match.000 Bosnian Croats in Mostar seem to be wealthier than their east side neighbours. even at night. Masses are being attended frequently by most Bosnian Croats. The commercial centre is much more developed than on the east side. the atmosphere in West Mostar is much more similar to Western Europe than it is in East Mostar. when it is illuminated. Two big shopping malls have been built after the war where almost anything is for sale that one could buy in Western Europe. the opposite is true for West Mostar.

For this reason it is impossible for most of them to come to the Evangelical Church on Sunday. It is interesting that all Bosnian Croats that had some connection to the Evangelical Church do live in West Mostar.” Before Helena became part of the Evangelical Church she only went to the Catholic Church at Easter and Christmas. but I am glad that I am Croatian. Helena is an interesting example. Sunday morning they go to the mass with their families. . Helena lives in West Mostar and has a fairly good job. Joining the Evangelical Church did not really mean a break with the church or with her family. I have a Croatian Passport. I am for a lot of stuff…I live here on the west side and it’s a lot nicer. even though their relationship with the Catholic Church was quite exceptional. for Bosnian Croats there is more to loose. She says about her ethnic background: "I can’t say that I’m not glad that I’m Croatian. She is a 25-year-old Bosnian Croatian woman. She was baptised in the Evangelical Church in 1996.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 161 search were in many ways proud to be Croatian. Many of the young people that come to worship meetings on Wednesdays have never told their family about their baptism. Half of my family is Orthodox. or I don’t hate Serbs. In the previous section I said that most Evangelical Bosnian Muslims do not live in East Mostar. because it would cause big problems within their family. but I’m glad I’m Croatian. Therefore. that is really a lot easier for me…I don’t really hate anyone. They keep their involvement with evangelical Christians a secret. Breaking with the Catholic Church would cause a break with their family and it would mean a betrayal of their ethnic group. I hang around with both. Taking this step would implicate a big risk. For other Bosnian Croats who are involved in the Evangelical Church this is a lot more problematic. The majority of the Bosnian Croats I interviewed are part of families that are better of than the families of Bosnian Muslims in Church. I don’t hate Muslims.

The church in Mostar was founded by Christians from Croatia (Kelly and Sheppard.162 Teoloãki åasopis. others only came to one particular kind of meeting. There are no clear boundaries that determine who is in and who is out. It is therefore very important for the evangelical Christians in Mostar that they belong to the evangelical Christian community. It is therefore really difficult to estimate how big this group of evangelical Christians is. some young people only come to the youth meetings on Sunday night. It is hard to define the Evangelical Church. and many people only come once in a while to activities organised by the church. For example. Many people are in some way or another involved in the church. almost all my informants were in some way or another involved with the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Some people come to almost every meeting. During my fieldwork I have visited many different meetings. At all these meetings I met different groups of people. I have separately discussed the identity of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. This was for many of them of crucial importance for the way they constructed their identity. Some of the pastors in BiH have studied at the evangelical theological seminary in Osijek in Croatia. religion is the main determinant for most people in Mostar to distinguish between ethnic groups. N° 9 Evangelical Identity in Mostar So far. The church in Mostar that I studied is part of the denomination of Evangelical/Pentecostal churches in BiH. other young people only come to worship meetings on . This denomination is connected to the Evangelical Churches in Croatia. Religious background determines the group a person belongs to. There is no Baptist church in Mostar. 1995). although it is clear that some people are definitely part of the church and some are not. Although all of them saw themselves as part of an ethnic group that transcended the church. The church has no official membership. As I have said before. for many individuals it is not so clear. In BiH there are two main denominations of protestant churches: Baptist churches and Evangelical/Pentecostal churches. However. Since I did my fieldwork in the Evangelical Church. all of them differ from the majority of their ethnic group when it comes to religion.

Just like any other social group the Evangelical Church has core members and members that take a less central position. On these meetings there is usually not one dominant ethnic group. The pastor of the church is from a mixed Serb/Croat background.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 163 Wednesday night and some come to both. but some activities there are attended by people from both congregations. Most of the young people are still in school except for some of the refugees. Usually about 8-10 people come to these meetings and they are all young people. Kosovo Albanians. Most evangelicals in the Mostar church are people with limited opportunities. Many people are without a job or have low paid jobs. the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: one in East and one in West Mostar. sometimes only a handful show up. On average around 30 to 40 people come to these meetings. Many of the refugees are illiterate. Hardly any students come to church although there are two universities in Mostar. The people that come to church activities come from a very mixed ethnical background. . Most people that live in these camps have come from Kosovo and some from Macedonia. On Wednesday evening worship meetings the majority of attendants is Bosnian Croat. I did most of my research in the Brankovac church in East Mostar. Significantly. People from both East and West Mostar are attending the Brankovac church meetings. On youth meetings on Sunday evening the majority of people is usually Bosnian Muslim and a relatively big group of refugees from other parts of the Balkans attend these meetings13 The number of people that come to these meetings changes a lot. In each of the buildings meetings are being held. 13 There are refugee camps in the vicinity of Mostar. Most of the people that come to church did not have much education. Bosnian Croats. A normal Sunday morning church service is usually attended by Bosnian Muslims. Gypsies and some people from England and the United States. Sometimes 25 people come.

Most of them speak some Bosnian or Croatian. or both of the parents come to church.164 Teoloãki åasopis. the songs that are sung. though to a lesser degree. come for a short period to Mostar.org/page4. N° 9 Most men in the church are under 25 and in general men are a minority in most church activities. In the first place the foreigners add up to the international character of the church. The presence of people from Western Europe and the U. The vision statement of one of these organisations. The way a service is organised.’ 14 Sometimes groups of missionaries from England or the U.S. Another relatively big share of the make-up of the church consists of foreign aid workers. Many of them have been in Bosnia for more than 5 years.novimost. says for example:‘The vision of Novi Most International is to see young people in Bosnia Herzegovina bringing hope to their country by being instruments of positive transformation. Usually about 5 to 10 people from Britain and the USA come to church services on Sunday morning. Most charity organisations provide humanitarian aid and combine this with evangelising activities.A. the way in which people pray. Somebody once said to me: ‘You will never find any Bosnian culture in the Evangelical Church in Mostar’.A. The reconstruction of Mostar attracted many of these missionaries. has quite a big impact on the identity of the Evangelical Church in Mostar. God is calling this generation of young Bosnians to be agents of positive transformation of their nation. 14 http://www. Most of these people work in Mostar as missionaries for charity organisations. Most young people that come to meetings do not go to the church service on Sunday morning.. Usually these groups come during the summer to work for one of the charity organisations. This is especially the case in the West Mostar church. Almost all the songs are translated American worship songs.S. all are very similar to the way these things are done in a Dutch or in an American Evangelical Church.html . Most of the time only those come of whom one.. but also in the Brankovac church. This international character of the church gives the members the idea that they are part of a trans-national network. called Novi Most.

The Pentecostal churches offer an alternative trans-national network to these people. In the last years the church has tried to make this group of rice Christians smaller. It is not surprising therefore that so many refugees have some sort of relationship with the church. are more easily attracted than people that already belong to such a network. The leaders in church have been cautious to render too much material aid. Some people were challenged in their motivations for coming to church. many people came to church because of material benefits. In this period many people stopped coming to church. Those people that are not part of a network that gives them security and a place of belonging. Apart from material benefits another factor that pulls people to the church is the idea of belonging to a group that provides a secure environment is. Poor people are more attracted to a group that provides some material aid than rich people. But the same is also the case for Bosnian Croats who join the Evangelical Church. In many ways the presence of foreigners and the contacts with foreign churches pull a specific group of people towards the church.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 165 Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez discuss the importance of trans-national religious networks in an article on trans-national youth gangs and Pentecostal churches (Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez. 2003). During and in the first few years after the war. Both Croats and Muslims are very hesitant to be baptised in the even those who have been involved with the church for a long period of time. The Pentecostal religious network offers a similar kind of security and identity as the youth gangs do. They show that young people from El Salvador who come from poor and powerless backgrounds find security and identity in international youth gangs. Some people in church call these people ‘rice Christians’. For Bosnian Muslims and Croats being baptised in the Evangelical Church is seen as a betrayal of their ethnicity. Muslims see baptism as a really big step. Often being outside of . People have told me that in the past this was more often the case. In Mostar the international character of the church also provides church members with a sense of belonging to a trans-national network. For some Muslim people it means breaking all the ties with the family.

an old Bosnian Muslim man. He was beaten up by Roman Catholics Christians. Another contradictory example is Mehmed. In the Evangelical Church people not only find a safe group. they also benefit from the presence of many international people. Her mother was shocked by the news. who wore .166 Teoloãki åasopis. For some groups. The insecure situation of Mostar creates the need for closely-knit groups that create a secure environment. N° 9 networks and being poor go hand in hand. This is the case for both Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. For others the causes of marginality are less obvious. For these people the Evangelical Church has a lot to offer. It also makes people part of a larger international network. She had kept it a secret for a long time. The Evangelical Church provides a safe environment for people from all ethnic groups. sometimes they don’t have the right connections. This brings material benefits. Nevertheless people choose to speak out for their faith. Sometimes it is because they live outside of town. Most people in Mostar find this security in one of the two major ethnic groups. like refugees. People that were marginalized in Mostar. now become citizens of a heavenly kingdom. Some Mostarians cannot find security in either one of these groups. This makes suffering in this world easier and gives people hope for a better future. Religious identity is therefore of great importance. For this reason many refugees are outsiders in Mostar. But this would not do justice to the reality that I encountered in Mostar. They have a totally different ethnic background and just do not belong to one of the groups. Furthermore it provides people with a conviction of hope. Ethnicity does not seem to play a big role in church. During the war in Mostar he was put in a prison camp by Bosnian Croats for the simple reason that he was a Muslim. Religion is the most important marker of identity for both of these groups. From my analysis one could conclude that people exclusively come to church to improve their situation. People from their own ethnic group see them as traitors. There are various possible reasons why some people do not find enough protection in one the major groups. Just after I left Mostar a Bosnian Croat girl told her mother about her baptism. Many people go through difficult situations because of their choice to become part of the Evangelical Church. it seems obvious.

I wanted to know if it was real or fake unity and I wanted to know where this apparent unity came from if it happened to be real. people do have freedom to make personal choices. After he was released from prison he decided to become a Christian and join the Evangelical Church. The west side . Reconciliation Since my first encounter with evangelical Christians in BiH I have been puzzled by the fact that some people from different ethnic backgrounds seem to get along so well in this community. The main question of this article concerns the role of the reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. conflict resolution and peace building in BiH. Most scholars focus on the importance of macro-political and macro-economical factors. a repetition of the disastrous events remains an unlikely but realistic possibility. In this prison he saw some kind of vision of Jesus.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 167 a picture of Jesus on their uniforms. As long as people do not reconcile on a local level. both churches have a very mixed group of attendants. In this sense the church seems to take part in the division of Mostar. This role has a lot to do with the way people deal with matters of ethnicity in church. Nevertheless. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church The Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: One in East Mostar and one in West Mostar. I will first discuss the role of reconciliation in the church. I now want to analyse the way in which I encountered reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Therefore I will also describe the role of ethnicity during church activities and outside of church matter. but my primary focus is on a grassroots level. The first time I saw a group of evangelicals worship together in unity it fascinated me. This example shows that although sociological factors have a lot of impact. If the conflict between normal citizens is not resolved. Much has been written about strategies of reconciliation. viable peace is impossible.

He explained to me that both churches have a different strategy of evangelism. you cannot change overnight and deny something that was implanted in you for such a long time. At the moment most people in church do not really seem to know why there are two buildings. The Christian symbol of the cross. About nationalism of the Bosnian Croats Ivan said: “Roman Catholic background people are more connected to being Croatian and are more proud of that and while actually coming to the Evangelical Church slowly you are losing that…I would say that it’s a process. This sounds like a logical explanation for the two church buildings. for example is not used in this church. Strangely enough a rather large proportion of the people that come to the East side church lives in West Mostar. The church in East Mostar was started in 1997 to create a place where Bosnian Muslims from east Mostar feel welcome. . A person has to loose these things when he or she joins the church. These Muslims are living in a homogeneous Muslim environment and might feel unwelcome in a church where a lot of Christian symbolism is used. why the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two buildings. The church in West Mostar has a strategy of evangelism that is designed for people who live in West Mostar.168 Teoloãki åasopis. ethnicity was supposed to play a minor role in church activities. Nationalism and ethnic pride are not very much accepted in the Evangelical Church. In an interview I asked Ivan. I believe that the idea of having two church buildings originated from this difference in strategy. That means for Bosnian Croats and for those Bosnian Muslims who live in a predominantly Christian environment and are therefore used to Christian symbolism. In the same interview with Ivan he clearly states that from the beginning of the church. N° 9 church is attended by a slight majority of Bosnian Croats and the East side church has a slight majority of Bosnian Muslims. but that later the churches developed in a way that does not match with this strategy. In my research I mainly focused on the church in East Mostar. People from both East and West Mostar both attend the services in this church. one of the leaders of the church in Mostar. but it is incomprehensible with the fact that so many people from West Mostar go to the church on the East side.

During the communist period all ethnic groups in Yugoslavia lived together with the motto ‘Bratstvo i Jedinstvo’ (brotherhood and unity). The Evangelical Church tries to stay away from all political matters. The foremost goal of the church is to reach people with the message of Jesus Christ.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 169 It’s a process. Ivan compared the situation in the Evangelical Church to the situation during the communist period. Of course reconciliation with God and forgiveness play a role in church. This situation is a result from the fact that people are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in church. For the church this is too much a political matter. This is an unintended way of bringing ethnic groups closer together. During church activities Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats get along without paying attention to each other’s ethnic background. In that sense the church does play a role in the reconciliation process. He said that people have to get along in church irrespectively of their ethnic background. The church does not play an active role in promoting reconciliation between ethnic groups in Mostar. For decennia communism seemed able to have relative success in uniting the different ethnic groups of Yugoslavia. This is seen as a spiritual goal. Reconciliation between ethnic groups does not have anything to do with this spiritual goal for most people in church. . Although ethnic groups mix in the Evangelical Church. In the Evangelical Church avoiding suppressing issues of ethnicity creates a situation that is comparable to the situation during the communist regime.” It is not very surprising that ethnicity does not play a major role during church activities. the life of Christ living in a person and slowly those things are dying. People that come to church have relatively much contact with people from a different ethnic background. Of course the violent break up of Yugoslavia has made many people sceptic about the value of this supposed unity under communist rule. but the church has an impact on the way church people construct their ethnic identity. reconciliation between ethnic groups is not part of the agenda of the church. but there are no activities organised with the aim of bringing ethnic groups closer together. This is an interesting comparison.

In my research I have tried to find out more about what lies behind this apparent unity. Because of its clarity. Scepticism towards brotherhood and unity during communism has proved right. but also on other occasions that had not much to do with the church. The pastor of the Brankovac church and his wife are both from a mixed Croat/Serb background. but also Kosovo Albanians. The years of shared ideology could not prevent the harsh conflict that broke out in 1991. In my research I have tried to find out if this unity that I encountered in church is also continued in the life of church people. An important question that I will discuss is therefore: how far do the relationships between people from different ethnic background in the church stretch? It could be possible that the apparent unity does not stretch beyond the church door. The Role of Ethnicity in the Life of Church People There is no need for thorough research to come to the conclusion that the Evangelical Church is a place where ethnic groups mix in a way that is uncommon outside of church. There are few occasions in which Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats voluntarily come together. this phenomenon was more the cause than the object of my research. First of all I want to describe the role of ethnicity in the activities organised by the Evangelical Church. Gypsies and Serbs. N° 9 The next question is of course if this unity stretches beyond the walls of the church. In my fieldwork I have observed people during church meetings. He explained to me that some people outside the church thought that the Evangelical Church was a church for people from a mixed background.170 Teoloãki åasopis. Usually these people were not just Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. people were present from various ethnic backgrounds. I have also interviewed church people about their ideas on ethnicity. . At almost all activities that I visited. Furthermore there often were some people from mixed ethnic background.

Secondly. On most occasions one or two people from a different background were present. The Wednesday night worship meetings where almost only visited by Bosnian Croats. the worship group had evolved out of an evangelism project. For all those who had a leading position in the church. Bosnian Croat or Albanian. People are in the first place evangelical Christian and not Bosnian Muslim. Sometimes it caused a lot of confusion when I tried to find out what a person’s ethnic background was. but it was not like on most other church-related activities. It was a topic that was not spoken about much. organised several years ago by an American missionary among Bosnian Croatian children. This determines the majority of their relationships.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 171 During meetings it usually took me a while to find out people’s ethnic background. Almost all the people that came to the worship meetings got involved with evangelical Christianity through this project. the less the importance of ethnicity. First of all these meetings were always held in West Mostar and therefore all the people that came lived in West Mostar. As I said earlier ethnicity does not play a foremost role during church activities. It therefore was a solid group and it was hard for outsiders to become part of that group. the pastor of the East side church explained to me that for many people ethnicity still plays a big role when they just start coming to church. Ethnicity is part of the old identity. There are several factors that explain this. As one becomes part of the church. because many people didn’t know to which group others belonged. be- . The longer they are evangelical Christian. but that they just did not have so much contact with them. the church more and more defines one’s identity. Perhaps non-Croats did not feel welcome because it is such a homogeneous group of Bosnian Croats. They all live in West Mostar and go to Catholic schools. There is one church related activity that is not attended by a mixed group of people. but they did not have a central role during the meetings. Most of them do not go to Sunday services in the Evangelical Church. ethnicity played a minor role. Marco. Of course sometimes people for whom ethnicity is an important issue came to church activities. In the interviews I had with some of the young people who come to these worship meetings they all told me that they had no problems with Bosnian Muslims.

People become friends with other people they meet in church activities. Like I said. an evangelical youth organisation in Mostar15 They start to build stronger relationships with other people that are involved in the Evangelical Church and this automatically means that they also develop more relationships with people from other ethnic backgrounds. One of the young people from this group started to come to church weekly and two others started to come once in a while. Some of them also got more involved with Novi Most. This is not enough to participate in the lives of all church people. I also had to observe and be part of people’s life outside of church affairs. the more he or she becomes part of a new network of people. They actively try to get more Bosnian Croatian children involved and more children from the West Mostar schools. The worship group is exceptional because it is predominantly visited by Bosnian Croats. People from different groups talk with each other. Ethnicity does not seem to play a significant role in these meetings. In many ways this was a difficult task. People get along with one another in church like nothing happened in the past. Outside of church activities I met only a small group of people frequently and this group consisted mainly of young people. During my research this pattern began to change. most activities are visited by an ethnically mixed group of people. They wanted to get more children from West Mostar involved and therefore moved to a new location close to the former frontline. they pray with each other and for one another. They go for coffee with one another and help each other with practical matters. More and more 15 During my stay Novi Most moved to a new location in Mostar. On the one hand it became clear to me that on the long term people build relationships in church that go beyond church matters. To get a more complete picture of people’s lives. .172 Teoloãki åasopis. The next important question is how far this apparent peaceful coexistence stretches. I only spent four months in Mostar. Before their club building had been in East Mostar. The longer a person is part of the church. They mainly worked with Bosnian Muslims and refugees. N° 9 cause they join their families to the mass.

I found that in many cases evangelical Christians stay attached to their ethnic group outside of church activities. predominantly consists of other Bosnian Muslims. all guests were Bosnian Muslims. However. In contrast to the previous example of Amela. She has lived most of her life in West Mostar and has been going to the Evangelical Church since her early childhood. Most of them had been friends for a long time and in many cases there was some kind of blood-tie. on the long term relationships will be built in the church that have an impact on people’s whole lives and also their relationships. Outside church affairs people maintain strong relationships with people from their own ethnic group. On her birthday party I did not see any Bosnian Croats. a girl from a Bosnian Muslim family.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 173 relationships are being built of mutual dependency. it is very difficult to build and maintain relationships with someone who lives on the other side of town. Unintentionally everyone becomes part of the division and reproduces it. One evening I was on a birthday party of Amela. A good example is Dijana. a Bosnian Croatian girl who comes to Sunday services in the Brankovac church. In Mostar this is almost unavoidable due to the all-embracing division of the city. The church does not have much impact on these relationships. Family relationships are for many Bosnians of great importance. They maintain strong relationships with other people in their ethnic group who are not part of the Evangelical Church. Dijana has a group of friends from a very . However. have become part of a very diverse social network. who have been going to church for a long time. Except from some British and Americans. Generally speaking the ethnic unification is not the same outside of church affairs as it is during church activities. Nevertheless it is striking that also the network of evangelical Bosnian Muslims that live in the Croatian part of Mostar. Her friends are mainly people from church. Almost every time I met her she was hanging out with other young people from church. For a person who lives in West Mostar and attends a school or works in this part of town. people also stay part of other social networks. Some people. It is not surprising that most of the family members belong to the same ethnic group. She helps out with the youth work.

Then the group started to beat him up because they knew he was a Bosnian Muslim. As far as I know. The contrasting examples of Amela and Dijana show that it is very difficult to draw general conclusions about the unifying effect of the church. Sometimes it becomes painfully clear that ethnicity still plays an important role in people’s lives. A youth leader from the Evangelical Church spoke to him about how he should try to forgive the people that beat him up. One day I met Amir and he looked like he had been in a fight. About a year ago he has been baptised in the Evangelical Church and ever since he has been very much involved in church matters. The following anecdote shows this. Many organisations in Mostar attempt to create spaces where Bosnian Muslims and . but also difficult objectives of most peace building organisations. is a small part of the post-war reconciliation process in the whole of Mostar and of BiH. N° 9 diverse ethnic background. where he is often the only Bosnian Muslim among Bosnian Croats. Young people grow up with the division and sooner or later it will affect them in some way. The situation in the Evangelical Church differs in many ways from the situation in other social groups. Several weeks after this event Amir was still scared to go to West Mostar. and his relationship with Bosnian Croat friends has not changed. Amir is an 18 year old Bosnian Muslim. which he did not have.174 Teoloãki åasopis. also in the lives of evangelical Christians. Much of the division along ethnic lines that characterises present-day Mostar and BiH is not present in the Evangelical Church. He also goes to Wednesday night worship meetings. He did not want to tell his name and then they asked for his identification card. This example shows how hard it is to avoid the conflict in Mostar. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Amir never took revenge. He loves going to these worship meetings. when he was walking around in West Mostar. Integration of ethnic groups is one of the most important. He told me that the previous night. despite his anger. Amir was of course not able to defend himself against a whole group of men. No one can completely avoid it. In many ways this process of integration seems to be happening in the Evangelical Church. a group of Bosnian Croats had come up to him and had asked him for his name.

the statue that was to symbolize unity was destroyed by vandals. This does of course not mean that they always will. Therefore ethnicity is not to have an important role during church activities. What is left now is the empty pedestal. This has an effect on people’s ideas about ethnicity and about matters concerning reconciliation. Their new identity is neither Muslim nor Croat. The division of Mostar has a lot of impact on people. In many ways the . So although in church people from different ethnic groups seem very much integrated. although it is not one of it’s objectives. However outside of church activities ethnicity often continues to play an important role in the life of evangelical Christians in Mostar. Outside of church activities the radical change of people’s lives appears often far more gradual. This is also the case for church people. but evangelical. People are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in the process of becoming part of the Evangelical Church. their lives and their social networks. People change their moral standards and their ideas about forgiveness in the process of becoming an evangelical Christian. In the Evangelical Church this is already the case for several years. In the Evangelical Church people are called to forgive each other. In fact reconciliation does not play an active role in the church. The more a person becomes part of the Evangelical Church the more his or her social environment changes. At the same time there is also a change in convictions. In church people are expected to start a new life with Jesus irrespective of their ethnic background.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 175 Bosnian Croats can get in contact with each other. Over time this has an effect on people’s lives. The primary objective of the church is to spread their message of Jesus Christ and most of it’s activities are focussed on this. This is mostly also a gradual process. but it does influence behaviour. Conclusion Shortly after the celebration of erection of the statue of Bruce Lee in Mostar. outside of church matters this integration appears to be less strong.

Almost none of the people that I studied during my fieldwork fit into the main categories in Mostar. One is tempted to become pessimistic when one is confronted with present-day Mostar. Ethnic differences do not play an important role in the church. But this is only a very small community and there are reservations to be made about the way in which reconciliation is established in the Evangelical Church. In fact ethnicity in general is a subject that seems to be avoided in church. In the Evangelical Church in Mostar some cautious steps towards reconciliation are being made.176 Teoloãki åasopis. In this article I have discussed the role of reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. It is the only religious group in Mostar that is ethnically mixed. The main reason for this is that they all belong to the Evangelical Church in some way or another. Rebuilding Mostar is a slow and laborious project. this is a striking phenomenon. the evangelical community defines their new identity. Unintended Reconciliation The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for close-knit communities. Being part of the evangelical community is therefore of crucial importance for them. a trans-national network to belong to and material aid. In a town where the division between ethnic groups determines nearly everything. N° 9 empty pedestal is a symbol in itself. I have tried to write about one of the small sections of society in which there is some reason for hope. When people join the church. People who neither adhere to the catholic nor to the Islamic faith are in a comparable marginalised position. Belonging to a group offers human security in the precarious circumstances of Mostar. It is a monument for all the fruitless efforts to unify Mostar. Some pessimists would say that reconciliation is not possible at all. The result is that the Evangelical Church in Mostar consists of people from various ethnic backgrounds. In this final paragraph I will draw some conclusions. For those people church offers a local community. When a person becomes part of the Evangelical . This means that they are not part of one of the main religious groups and it is religion that for most people defines their ethnic identity.

One of the reasons for this is that it is not easy to find matters of common interest. By joining the Evangelical Church one becomes a citizen of a heavenly kingdom. This ethnic mix is possible because issues of ethnicity are intentionally avoided. not with the objective of overcoming the division that is so present in Mostar. In this way prejudices can be overcome and people can start building relationships with people from other groups. The people who come to church have common interests in going to church.The first objective of the church is to reach people with its message about Jesus. Many of these efforts are fruitless. The intended role of reconciliation might be minimal but in the Evangelical Church reconciliation between people does take place. outside of church activities ethnicity does play a role in the life of evangelical Christians. Many of the people . Reconciliation is too much a political issue and the church does not want to be involved in political matters. The church does not have any strategies to reconcile people from different ethnic groups. but in order to worship their God. However. People’s social life is often strongly influenced by one’s ethnic background. In Mostar much effort is put into creating places where Muslims and Croats can meet. The conflict in Mostar has created two groups that have no urgent need to interact. Reconciliation is a process that needs a lot of time. A Bosnian Muslim can live his whole life in East Mostar and a Bosnian Croat has no need to go to East Mostar. would be a premature conclusion that the reconciliation process does not play any role in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. People from different ethnic background come together. This makes integration a very difficult objective. First of all they find a strong community. They benefit from coming to church in various ways.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 177 Church he is expected to replace some of his ethnic identity by an evangelical Christian identity. A safe environment is created for people from all different ethnic groups by largely avoiding issues concerning ethnicity.However. Building bridges across the gap between Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats does not happen overnight. Reconciliation is not one of the main objectives of the Evangelical Church. yet in a more unplanned way.

So far the effect of the church on the rest of Mostar is relatively small. The presence of foreign aid workers in church is something church people often benefit from in a direct way. This explains the ethnic diversity in church. Many of the people in church come from a poor and powerless background. When a person joins a religious group this has an effect on his personal system of meaning making. It is especially attractive for those people who are in need of a strong community. However . This integration creates good ground for reconciliation. People start to build relationships with people from different ethnic backgrounds. N° 9 who come to church would otherwise be marginalised. the church is part of a trans-national network. These benefits attract people from all different ethnic background. material aid or a change of convictions and these people are present in every ethnic group in Mostar. Maybe this will slowly change in the future when stronger relationships are being built among church people. People are often unaware of the social conditions that have an impact on the choices they make. Being part of such a community gives otherwise marginalised people a strong sense of belonging. Many of them do not fit automatically in one of the main groups in Mostar. Thirdly. Secondly people benefit in material ways from being part of the church. people’s convictions change. Often people return to their own ethnic groups outside of church matters. The integration of ethnic groups in the church is an unintended spin-off effect of the church. Evangelical Christianity gives people very clear goals in life and it gives people hope for a better future. I defined religion as part of the total framework of systems of meaning making. However this is still a slow process and the integration does not stretch far beyond church activities. I do not think that is the case. Being part of a network offers people very practical opportunities. From this perspective it may seem like people join the church in a very calculating way. in the process of becoming part of a church.178 Teoloãki åasopis. Church provides a local community and furthermore. Maybe reconciliation should become an intentional objective for the church. By becoming part of the church they acquire a place in a strong network.

G. 1967 The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion New York: Doubleday. 1995 Medjugorje: Religion Politics. 1999 The Multicultural Riddle. A.L. Rethinking National. S. 41-56. 1994 Towards an Anthropology of European Communities.) 1994. pp. Baumann. and Luckmann. In: Meyer. 1966 The social Construction of Reality New York: Anchor Books. Bibliography Appadurai. The Anthropology of Europe. P. Berger. 305-324. Boissevain. Bax.L. V. (eds. Oxford: Berg. P. Nationalist Partition and International Intervention London: Hurst and Company.). Ethnic. M. A. (ed. Berger.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 179 in some ways it could serve as a model for many organisations who try to reconcile people in Mostar. B. pp. and Violence in Rural Bosnia Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij. In: Goddard. 2002 Bosnia after Dayton. J. . 1999 Certainty: Ethnic Violence in the Era of Globalization. Globalization and Identity Oxford: Blackwell. Th. Bose. and Geschiere P. and Religious Identities London: Routledge.

Religion across the Americas London: Rutgers University Press. 2000 Bosnia. Lifton. Manuel A. Zaitchik. 2006 Mostar’s little dragon. Vásquez. Princeton: Princeton University Press. J. D. T. Lambek. York: Basic Books. 1995 The protean self: human resilience in an age of fragmentation. M. 1995 Miracle in Mostar Oxford: Lion Publishing. Kelly. (ed. . H. April 2006. Identity and Community in a Central Bosnian Village. Eriksen. (1995).180 Teoloãki åasopis.com/archives/2006/04/01/mostars-littledragon. Chandler. Faking Democracy after Dayton London: Pluto Press. 2002 Ethnicity and Nationalism London: Pluto Press. R. and Marie Friedmann Marquardt 2003 Globalizing the Sacred. URL:http://reason.) 2002 A Reader in the Anthropology of Religion Malden/Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. T. L. and Sheppard. A. N° 9 Bringa. 1995 Being Muslim the Bosnian way. G.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 181 .

182 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 PREGLEDNI RADOVI .

Jim Payton 183 UDK 281. thought.. Let us now consider briefly your Orthodox “Christian outlook” (to borrow Fr. Even our recognition of our limitations in speaking of him can only be . all matters are seen in their spiritual dimensions and significance. society. All else came into being only by his creative activity. with the collapse of Communist restrictions and the opportunity to live as God’s faithful in freedom.96"20" Primljeno: 25. you Orthodox—here in Serbia and in other Eastern European countries—have a new opportunity to influence your society with your rich heritage.2010 Prihvañeno: 30. “There are no commonplace. non-religious matters: The ‘Christian outlook’ is one whole. One of the renowned Russian Orthodox leaders of the past recognized this Orthodox potential: Father Alexander Yelchaninov said. and all vocations.C e n t u r y In this 21st century. Yelchaninov’s designation).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dr. incomparable. in the words of the Nicene Creed. education. In himself.03. but nothing in that creation is on a continuum with him: God is not the “ultimate” member in a chain of being. and of all things visible and invisible. God is and forever will remain beyond us— incomprehensible.. or anything else. Orthodoxy confesses.03. Yelchaninov recognized that Orthodoxy’s worldview includes the whole of creation.”1 Fr. that God Almighty is “Maker of heaven and earth.” God made but is utterly different from his creation. And within it. and ineffable.2010 Pregledni Ålanak An Orthodox World View For Life In The 21 . This is not so only because we are finite: it is because he is transcendent..

By using the gifts God had given them as his image-bearers. as St. N° 9 couched in thoughts and terms derived from our created human intellectual capacities. in its future development. humans were to manifest the greatness of God’s creation by bringing to light and fruition all that God had prepared the creation to become.8 to bring out the fullness of its potential to the glory of God. they were positioned at the intersection of everything else in creation and called to work with that creation. the material and the immaterial. in his essence. Orthodoxy stresses that God made the creation dynamic. and God had built into all creation the potential with which it should develop.3 While what he created was utterly different from the Creator.2 And yet. in philosophical terminology.7 As God’s image-bearers. and has its being. Humanity was to serve as priests. Composed of body and soul.5 The cosmos only had meaning. life. offering all the wonders of creation. absolutely immanent. Gregory Palamas has reminded us. But it still had to develop. moves. The one who. In stark contrast to ancient Greek philosophy’s endorsement of the eternally static and unchanging as the ultimate good. God made human beings as the only creatures who would share equally in both the realms of creation—in the words of the Nicene Creed. and future in the God who made and sustained it.9 since it was complete and harmonious. God is beyond even our awareness that he is beyond us. to God’s praise. human beings participated in both realms.6 As both St. God is nearer to his creation than we can grasp.184 Teoloãki åasopis. human beings were placed in the Garden of Eden. This was true for all of creation.” as God pronounced it at the end of his creative work. it was true also for humanity. who enjoyed a special place in the creation. but only in him.”4 God did not make the creation self-sustaining: it could have no life in itself. John of Damascus taught. is utterly transcendent is. they were even more greatly privileged to bear the image of God. It was “very good. while human beings were greatly privileged to be thus the only microcosm of all the rest of creation. “the visible and the invisible”. that Creator nevertheless was the one in whom the entire creation “lives. under the leadership of his human vice-regents. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Orthodoxy—fol- . in his energies.

but the divine one. and took their descendants with them. Basil the Great and St.15 Eventually.13 Through subsequent human history. and stewardly manner with everything else in creation. The creation should develop over time. Dependent on him—as was all of the rest of creation—humanity was to deepen its commitment to him in lives of joy. This task would not be completed in only a few days or years: the God who had made all things also created time. they were to acquire the divine likeness as they served and communed with God. sought a short-cut to that likeness: heeding the suggestion of the tempter. he fulfilled that promise and sent not only a human son. they looked to the creation rather than to the Creator for what they needed. service. we have been attracted by what serves our fleeting temporal existence. Maximos Confessor10—urges that the “ultimate good” for creation is its God-given dynamism. and we have filled our mouths with sand.14 The garden has become a desert. loving.12 In so doing.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 185 lowing the teaching of St. in which everything is always in process of change and development. a champion who would overcome evil. the second person of the Trinity. we have misused the rest of creation for our own benefit—in government. . or possessions). bringing out all its latent possibilities. down through history—were to work in a gentle. becoming more deeply committed to their God and increasingly aware of his greatness and his love toward his creation. society. our first parents—and their descendants. Seeking the most of our brief life. they tried to become like God by eating the forbidden fruit. In dependence on and faithful communion with God. rather than drawing near to the One for whose fellowship we were created but whose eternal existence is beyond our comprehension.16 God’s Son. In so doing. as one of their descendants.11 But our first parents. and love: created in the divine image. intending it to unfold into the sweep of subsequent history. Adam and Eve. human beings would themselves develop. God promised our fallen first parents that he would send. and the environment with little thought for its development and more for our advantage (in power. and humanity was to lead it progressively in that development. depending thus on what had no life in itself. they fell into death. influence. all to the glory of the Creator.

18 All this Orthodoxy celebrates in the gathering of the church. But. If any of this strikes you as new. since I have not found these matters discussed anywhere in the Orthodox literature available to me.”17 The incarnation was not only a rescue operation for fallen human beings. in this life and on this earth. Christ yielded to what had no power over him.186 Teoloãki åasopis. he overcame humanity’s enemies—sin. Much more could be said in sketching out the riches of an Orthodox worldview. Orthodox worship rightly understood impels the faithful to vigorous Christian action in the world. In uniting humanity and deity. and the Eucharist. in order to break its power over others. if so. Perhaps you who are Orthodox already recognize all I will say. the divine Son became all that the first man was called to be—faithful to God and devoted to him through all his life. death. in all they do. Alexander Schmemann urges. and “the Word became flesh. The resurrected Christ summons us to enter into the fullness of our humanity in this life. in taking upon himself the death Adam had brought into the world. John Chrysostom long ago spoke about this as “the liturgy after the liturgy. We are called anew to the task given our first parents: we are to give ourselves freely and fully to work in and develop all of creation—a creation now redeemed in Jesus Christ20—to God’s glory. God—who alone has life in himself—broke the stranglehold of death on humanity. in his resurrection. Let me now briefly suggest three implications of this worldview for life in the 21st century. as the Orthodox liturgist Fr. though: it offered hope for all of creation. but I trust that what we have considered is sufficient to indicate its broad contours. since in the incarnation God established a bridge between himself as Creator and his creation. The opportunities of serving him in this life are as unlimited as the vastness of creation and its manifold potential. N° 9 took humanity unto himself in the incarnation. I claim no originality for it: I am only trying to think with . its liturgy. and the devil—to free us to live unto God in the present life.” In Jesus Christ human beings are freed and enabled. to live up to humanity’s original calling—every day. on this earth. I can only beg your indulgence. in coming as fully human.19 St.

medicine. In the first place. He has set us free to resume our human task of developing culture. from an Orthodox perspective. sport. and in all places. In all our labors and learning. redeemed and restored in Christ. an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would embrace the wide diversity of God’s manifold creation. Thirdly. all to God’s glory. science. an inescapable responsibility in faithfully learning. The privilege of serving the resurrected Christ is not restricted to priests and monks: human beings can serve him in all legitimate occupations. or whatever—are the exploration and elucidation of what God placed within the creation. economics. His dynamic creation has built into it all the possibilities that God intends for it. . and he calls his image-bearers to develop that creation to its full potential. God’s creation and his calling on our lives encourage us to engage in such exploration. he remains ever transcendent. but engaging in the work of ongoing explorations and reflections which will enhance what we may learn about the cosmos. Whatever humankind may manage to develop. art. politics. There is nothing—no realm of scholarship. Responsible life before God implies not only passing on what has already been learned. technology. in every day. depends on him—and. needs to be studied and taught as his. we are always encountering the divine energies: keeping him in mind is. consequently. the sciences. consequently. we will be working with the still rich potential God built into the “all things visible and invisible” which he created.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 187 you through the implications of your worldview for life in the present day. As we live. an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would encourage all the faithful to develop their potential for God’s service as his image-bearers and vice-regents. literature. music. government. Even so. We examine what we now know of that creation and seek ways to develop both our knowledge and that creation further. All comes from him. business. no function of interpersonal society—which is secular. as we learn (whether in school or by experience). we must honor both God’s essence and his energies. Whatever advances we or others may achieve in any field of endeavor—in culture. Secondly. no section of life. all that can be studied comes from God’s creative activity.

as medical researchers or politicians.188 Teoloãki åasopis. as leaders in society or as followers. Human beings now can honor Christ the Creator and Redeemer by becoming fully all he has gifted them to be—as historians or electricians. from an Orthodox perspective. as chemists or homemakers. taking their place in our human task of unfolding the riches of that creation to the praise of its Creator. as political scientists or factory workers. . I pray this will transpire among the Orthodox faithful here in Serbia in the 21st century. Thus. An Orthodox worldview has the potential to invigorate and stimulate the faithful today to become all God has made them to be. Thank you. N° 9 and everything else out of what God had prepared his magnificent creation to become. we can honor Christ in all areas of life.

Cf the declaration of St. Fr. 2. The Orthodox Faith 2:12.8. John of Damascus. 1974). 1974). 2:3. during the course of the Hesychast controversy. and St. 4. . John the Theologian: “All things came into being through him [the Logos].. St. Gregory of Nyssa. trans. as cited in George P. New York: St. Gregory Palamas.19. Gregory Palamas had occasion to emphasize it. John of Damascus (The Orthodox Faith 2:12) urged this. The Triads. 11-14. and without him not one thing came into being that has come into being. Alexander Yelchaninov. see also the somewhat broader treatment in his Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes (New York: Fordham University Press. 1:3. 6. 1988). Maximos Confessor all made wide use of it. the treatment in John Meyendorff. In him was life (John l:3-4a). and Oratio 45:7. St. George Lawrence (Crestwood. 16) and St. Oratio 38: 11. 5. 2d ed. St. 206-207. Basil the Great. Gregory the Theologian. St. 7. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. This understanding of humanity is presented by St. De variis difficilibus locis. 3. and St. on the basis of Genesis 1:26-27. A Treasury of Russian Spirituality (Fadux: Btichervertriebsansalt. Acts 17:28. Gregory of Nyssa (De Opificio Hominis.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 189 NOTES 1. cf. St. The essence/energies distinction was common among the ancient Greek fathers: St. Maximos Confessor. 256. A Study of Gregory Palamas. Fedotov.

‘Let us make humankind in our image. St. and fill the earth and subdue it. and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth. Basil the Great taught this in his Hexaemeron. Maximos Confessor argued it in Adversus Thallassium. ‘Be fruitful and multiply. but likeness was understood to be the goal toward which human beings were to develop. 43). according to our likeness. Cyril of Jerusalem. and over the cattle. 13. ‘You will not die: for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God’”. male and female he created them. “Then God said.. ‘Let us make humankind in our image. for in the day that you eat of it you shall die’”. the discussion in John Meyendorff. She took of its fruit and ate. Ch. N° 9 8. Maximos Confessor agrees with these senti- .. Byzantine Theology (as in n. 60. among the Greek fathers. 9.. St. in the image of God he created them. “The first man brought in universal death” (Catechesis 13:2). and over the birds of the air.. 2 above). 132-134. but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. St. it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). and over all the wild animals of the earth. “Then God said. and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea. “And the Lord God commanded the man. 3:4-6). and he ate" (Genesis 2:16-17.190 Teoloãki åasopis. image was understood as given in creation. according to our likeness’” (Genesis 1:26).. ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden. in the same vein. God blessed them and God said to them. 11. Homily 5. “We receive mortality from him [Adam]” (Questions and Answers.’ So God created humankind in his image. 10. and she also gave some to her husband. and indeed. “God saw everything that he had made.. 12. “But the serpent said to the woman. and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth’” (Genesis 1:26-28). According to St. who was with her. Anastasius of Sinai said. cf.

specifically citing St. Fr. his Byzantium and the Rise of Russia: A Study of Byzantino-Russian Relations in the Fourteenth Century (Crestwood. God sent his Son. 18. The above summarizes the views of St. God declared. In response to what had transpired. he will strike your head.. 123. 15. St. 1989).g. he repeatedly urges that Orthodox worship should drive the faithful out into the world to engage in service (e. his Quaestiones ad Thalassium). Theodoret of Cyprus. New York: St. and St. 17. 7 above). born of a woman” (Galatians 4:4). St. As well. Schmemann frequently deals with worldview issues as he treats Orthodox worship and sacraments in his For the Life of the World: Sacraments and Orthodoxy (Crestwood. rightly understood. and you will strike his heel” (Genesis 3:15). In his Byzantine Theology (as in n. would lead to neglect of contemporary issues and problems: cf. and virtually all the ancient Greek fathers on the accomplishment of redemption by the incarnate Son of God. St. New Jersey: St. 96-107. Paul wrote that “When the fullness of time had come. in this work. 16. 113. 19. 14. 134). Vladimir’s Seminary Press.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 191 ments (cf. and between your offspring and hers. John Meyendorff has argued that nothing in Orthodoxy. Cyril of Alexandria. cf. his argument at 21. 1973). Gregory Palamas (144-145). John Meyendorff summarizes the consensus of the ancient Greek fathers and subsequent Byzantine Orthodox leaders on these points. Maximos Confessor. John 1:14. “I will put enmity between you [the serpent]and the woman. Irenaeus. Theophylact of Ohrid. 100. Gregory the Theologian. as do virtually all the Greek fathers. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Theodore of Mopsuestia. . St. John Chrysostom.

. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Lossky cites the statement by St. N° 9 In his Orthodox Theology: An Introduction (Crestwood. Vladimir Lossky urges. “A few drops of blood make the universe whole again” (patristic source not given). 1978).192 Teoloãki åasopis. which extends across the entire cosmos” (114). in confirmation of this. New Jersey: St. Gregory the Theologian. “Redemption is a wondrous reality.

by which Luke has wrapped it up the positive outcome of the decision of the Jerusalem Council that is followed by Acts 15:36.” recommended by Charles Van Engen. Acts 15:35 is the typical summary statement .what I would entitled . geographical. by which Luke has ended his report of the First Missionary Journey. Likewise.the Jerusalem Council event: Acts 15:1-35.which. the typical summary statement.in the light of both its immediate and broad biblical context and its multifaceted (historical.that followed the Acts 14:28. theological. since Acts 15:1 is a typical introductory sentence . the introductory sentence of the Second Missionary Journey. By the linking word 1 See Van Engen 1998. This is obvious. The Acts 15:22-29 passage immediately follows the concluding speech of James (15:13-21). in this case. Definition of the Passage The Acts 15:22-29 passage is the integral part of . The purpose of the exegesis of Acts 15:22-29 is to listen the text itself . 1 1. cultural. . ecclesiological and missiological) background . is opening up a new topic (controversial question related to circumcision that ruined Jewish/Gentile Christian relationship) .08 Twelve Steps In The Exegesis Of The Acts 15:22-29 The exegetical method utilized in this study is the “Twelve Steps in the Exegesis of a Paragraph.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dimitrije Popadiñ 193 UDK 22.to interpret the text (with respect to the selected prominent commentaries) and to understand areas and principles of its implications. 10.

Thus.since it is part of Luke’s one -though two volumes . the preparation for His dead and resurrection. In this perspective. Accordingly. as the geographical place (verse 30 follows the events in Antioch) and as the event (the meeting of the apostles and the church) by citing the letter-conclusion of the Council. the prologue is the preparation for the coming of the Spirit. but it is a passage with its own identity: it carries the contents of the conclusion of the Jerusalem Council. 3. Textual Variation The most significant textual variation of the Acts 15:22-29 passage has to do with the phrase: kai tou pniktou (“and what is stran- . which is the preparation for His ascension.versus Acts alone . Acts 15:1-35) as the preparation for the new level of the cross-cultural mission. the Acts 15: is the preparation for the new level of the cross cultural mission both in terms of the more explicit definition of the content of the message (the gospel is “free” from “burdens” of the Jewish culture). the prologue is the preparation for the teaching and the ministry of Jesus. could be considered as a preparation for Acts (and the Acts as the preparation for the mission of the Church.” (29). which is. which is the preparation for mission. Within the gospel of Luke. as a whole. Gospel of Luke. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Luke/Acts Acts 15:22-29 passage has to be considered in its relationship with Luke/Acts .both. N° 9 “Then” (22) the writer begin to presents the corporate decision of the Council and the action taken by it (“chose… wrote a letter and sent…” 22.work. Within the Acts.194 Teoloãki åasopis. 2. I can recognize this passage (with its immediate context. the writer is “leaving” the Jerusalem Council . and in terms of the grater potential to geographically spread away from the center (Jerusalem). Acts 15:22-29 is the sequence of the Acts 15:1-35. again. 23) and by the other “border-passage-verse. which could be seen as the preparation for the Second Coming of Christ).

things sacrificed to idols.’” This concern is build in the Jerusalem Decree (proposed by James. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Related Scriptures Simon Peter has learned a significant lessons (Lk 15:11-32 and Acts 10:1-48) which have undermined his ethnocentrism and help him to understand the non-legalistic nature of God’s message of salvation. the controversial demand for the circumcision lied upon the Gentles. However. Tannehill 1998. blood and 3.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 195 gled”). is Paul’s compassion for the concern of the Jewish Christians that “as Gentiles become the majority within the church”. 2. we see Paul affirming Timothy’s circumcision. 2 4. a Jew). and 4. and Tertullian in the early third century). which has been omitted in Western text of the Codex Bezae (D) and the Harclean Syriac (apparatus). 11. and its four -prohibitions (1. blood. he (as well as James in that regard) has considered being a “yoke” (10).stands in contrast with the Egyptian or Alexandrian text found in the Codex Vaticanus (B). This three-prohibitions ( 1. Thus. Even though the Jerusalem Council has made clear that the circumcision is not required for salvation (and Paul’s writing emphases the primacy of the circumcision of the hearth). 2. since it takes into the consideration Jewish feelings about the outward behavior of the 3 2 3 See Smith 1919. they “might then have to choose withdrawal into isolation or ‘apostasy from Moses. fornication) Apostolic Decree . fornication) Apostolic Decree that is understood by its authorities as a ceremonial in nature.understood by the Western authorities as ethical in nature . apparently contradictory act. for example. (also confirmed by Irenaeus in the second. things sacrificed to idols. most probably because of the strict language of the Leviticus 17 and 18. a special warning regarding the restriction of eating any manner of blood have needed to be enclosed with the final decision of the Jerusalem Council. particularly 17:10. . 191. things strangled. Robert Tannehill explains that the reason for such. 3.

verse 4. thus. N° 9 growing community of Gentles. In short. Marshall 1983. where His apostles are the ministers and from where the gospel was spread all over. and to us” (verse 28).especially to the rite of circumcision .” and there is no parallel for such a phrase.196 Teoloãki åasopis. I will not discuss this issue. and the whole congregation was present. (Given place. The time of the Jerusalem Council falls in between the First and the Second Missionary Journeys. apostles and elders assembled for the meeting. “emphasize the church’s role as the vehicle of the Spirit. and it is made by the “original” church established by Christ. 255. are not under the submission to the Jewish law . and thus it is determined by them. The Major Theme of Acts 15:22-29 The Church in Jerusalem has made an authoritative decision that the Gentiles. the Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features and. The decision is an authoritative one since it is inspired by the Holy Spirit. verse 7. versus 12 and 22). 315. you don’t have to circumsize. Literal Features of the Acts 15:22-29 The words. by accepting the Gospel of Grace.but they should only “abstain from sacrifices offered to idols and from blood and from animals strangled and from fornication:” (verse 29). wherever the Church have had its regular meetings. “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit. 4 5 Bruce 1983. 5. by which Luke is wrapping up the decision of the Council. Furthermore. .) 6. Geographical and Historical Setting The Jerusalem Council took place in the Church in Jerusalem. I am impressed by the careful construction of the letter. regarding which “some critics claim that it is a literary composition by Luke himself. (Paul and Barnabas arrived in Jerusalem. which are now consisting the Church.” 4 5 7.

in that discloses organization of the early Church in terms of the role of the apostles. by a council. to confirmed that. apostles. Ecclesiological. elders and the congregation and the way of solving the church’s controversies e. 9. There are two categories of the people: the senders of the letter. Missiological contribution of this passage is that clarifies the church’s understanding of the cross-cultural characteristic of the Gospel (because it is supra-cul- .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 197 8. blood and fornication (29). Pneumatological. nd rd 10.including Judah (who is called Barsabas) and Silas.g. The Main Theological Concept of Acts 15:22-29 The pneumatological. The “Outline” of the Theme of Acts 15:22-29 I see the “outline” of the support of the main theme of Acts 15:22-29 as following: • The Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features • The Jews that “upset your souls” (24) were not our representatives. elders . in that reveals the direct involvement of the Holy Spirit in the Church’s leadership and the decision making in general and. we are in agreement with the Holy Spirit (28). and the recipients.and the whole [Jerusalem] church. • We are sending you our elders.” (verse 23). “who were leaders among the brethren” . 26) [and their opinion]. • In that. ecclesiological and missiological contribution of the passage are obvious. “to the brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia. • We are confirming Paul and Barnabas (25. Judah and Silas (27). together with the Paul and Barnabas (verse 22). in particular. The People Involved in Acts 15:22-29 All of the people mentioned in this passage are listed in the 22 and the 23 verse. • The only exceptions has to do with the idols. one which relates to the expansion of the Christian faith cross-culturally.

In its letter. Acts 15:22-29 has theological. They acted decisively and they made a specific decisions regarding both what they decided about the controversy and how they would convey their decision. “The decision of the Council is put down in writing. Harrison 1986. N° 9 tural in nature) and enables it to carry out the Great Commission with authenticity. submitted to the guidance of the Holy Spirit.g.e. Without an active participation (or. better: leadership) of the Holy Spirit. task-oriented and delegating church. the Council “carefully dissociated the Jerusalem church from those of their number who had made the demand contained in 15:1. ecclesiological and missiological implications. Verse 23. 11. a church would create a platform for a fulfillment of God’s will. with an open-minded discussion of all participants. This passage is a lighthouse to a church at any time and any place. The church in Jerusalem was well-organized. Furthermore. Implications Accordingly. it will be a yoke that troubles peoples’ souls more then it helps. 12. to know how to act when faced with the controversy. since there was no authorization. If authentic . Conclusions in the Light of the Prominent Commentaries Verse 22. Gathered for the sake of Christ.it will be a blessing toward salvation to the recipients of the Gospel. the church would lose its God-given identity of being people of God.” Verse 24. an organization that uses the means and methods of human secular societies. 253. 34. and it will consequently become a humane institution. If institutionalized.” 6 7 6 7 Kurnizgen 1966.198 Teoloãki åasopis. Holy Spirit lead and inspired . . the nature of the church would determine the nature of its mission. This is important. The Church is a properly ordered community.

They would not only deliver the letter. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House. 1. 1983 Commentary on the Book of the Acts. 1986 Interpreting Acts: The Expanding Church. 288. Kurnizgen. 251. 335. 8 9 10 Stott 1990. Gerhard A.27. Vol. Grand Rapids: Academie Books Zondervan Publishing House. Krodel. .Eerdmans Publishing Company. Everett F. The Council “made it abundantly clear that the men they had now agreed to choose…and send… did have their full approval and support.” Verse 28. F. but also confirm by word of mouth what it contained. New York: Herder and Herder.” 8 9 10 REFERENCES CITED Bruce.” “Verse 29 lists the four provisions of the apostolic decree just as originally proposed by James (v.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 199 Verse 25 . The leaders (apostles and elders) and the assembly (whole Jerusalem church) “are included in the pronoun us. Josef 1966 The Acts of the Apostles. Harisson. Krodel 1986. 1986 Acts: Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament. Polhill 1992. Grand Rapids: William B. 20). while the Holy Spirit functions as the chief authority to which the church and its leaders give their agreement.

I. Stott. John R. Fuller Theological Seminary.” MT 523 Course Description and Syllabus. David 1919 The Life and Letters of St. Tannehill. Leicester. Neshville: Broadman Press. Howard 1983 The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. England: Inter-Varsity Press and Grand Rapids: William B. W. Mineapolis: Fortress Press. Paul. Smith. Charles 1998 “The Holy Spirit and Mission in Luke/Acts. Robert 1998 The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts A Literary Interpretation. Van Engen. 1990 The Spirit the Church and the World: The Message of Acts. 1992 The New American Commentary: Acts. John B. . Vol 2. Polhill. New York: Doran. Eerdmans Publishing Company. N° 9 Marshall.200 Teoloãki åasopis.

Svrha egzegeze ovoga odlomka jeste „sluãanje“ samoga teksta. kulturne. i identifikovanje i razumevanje odreœenih oblasti i principa primene ovoga teksta. eklesioloãke i misioloãke) pozadine. i to prema uputima profesora Åarlsa Van Engena.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 201 Rezime U ovom ålanku autor predstavlja dvanaest koraka procesa egzegeze svetopisamskog teksta opisa Jerusalimskog sabora (Dela 15:22-29). . i to u svom uæem i ãirem biblijskom kontekstu i u svetlu njegove viãeslojne (istorijske. geografske. teoloãke. tumaåenje teksta s osvrtom na odabrane priznate komentare.

202 STRUÅNI RAD .

net ) Duhovni aspekti bolesti Biblijska perspektiva Rezime Pre oko dve hiljade godina Isus je prolazio sa svojim uåenicima pored jednog slepca. teol. Kada su u pitanju uzroci bolesti. koji je bio slep od roœenja. a i mnogi drugi. da li je moæda ta bolest samo rezultat ljudske nemarnosti za oåuvanjem sopstvenog zdravlja? Verujem da mnogi hriãñani.2010 Hriãñanska etika i duãebriæniãtvo Pregledni ålanak Protestantski Teoloãki Fakultet u Novom Sadu Pastor Hriãñanske Baptistiåke Crkve u Novom Sadu ( pilicnip@nspoint. zaãto dolazi do bolesti. pitanja mogu biti postavljena na sledeñi naåin: da li je neko ljudsko biñe bolesno zbog posledice greha? Da li je to ljudsko biñe moæda bolesno zato ãto ga je Sotona hteo iskuãati kao Jova? Ili. Meœutim. Meœutim.23:616 Asistent . Neki pokuãavaju da shvate smisao bolesti.02.03. ljudi se i danas pitaju zaãto ih takav bol. Zato su i postavili takvo pitanje. kada govorim o duhovnim aspektima bolesti æelim naglaãenije govoriti o postavci Isusa i njegovih . Prihvañeno: 01.2010 Svetske religije. æele odgovor na ovo pitanje kao i Hristovi uåenici u ono vreme. Isusovi uåenici su znatiæeljno postavili svom uåitelju jedno vaæno pitanje: “ravi. on.predavaå za predmete Primljeno: 22. ili njegovi roditelji pa se slep rodio?” (Jovan 9:1-3).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 203 Dipl. patnja ili kazna snalazi. Oni su smatrali da je u pitanju bio greh. danas. ko je zgreãio. Petar Piliñ UDK 234. U ovom radu bih hteo prvo da kaæem neãto o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja.

na prvom mestu o bolestima. Bog je rekao svom narodu: “Ako dobro uzasluãaã glas Gospoda Boga svojega. Zatim. u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja. Novi zavet. Bolest je u Starom zavetu bila Boæija kazna za neposluãnost. lekar tvoj”. Bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja Bog je onaj koji daje zdravlje åoveku. Uåitelj i Gospod. bolest. 32:39). greh. æelim da vidim kako se Isus postavljao u takvim sluåajevima. ali takoœe i puãta bolest na åoveka (Pnz. Bog se brinuo za zdravlje svog naroda ali narod je trebao da mu bude posluãan.dogaœaj koji govori o Boæijoj kazni za Avimeleka i njegovom pomilovanju. Smatram da u Njegovim i njihovim postavkama leæi smisao. æelim da vidim i kako su se Njegovi uåenici postavljali u sliånim situacijama. nijedne bolesti koju sam pustio na Misir neñu pustiti na tebe. pogotovo za pripadnike izabranog naroda. isceljenje. Åovek je u Boæijim rukama i niko i niãta ne moæe izbaviti åoveka iz njegovih ruku jer je Bog åovekov Stvoritelj. Zato. i kako bi trebali i danas. U knjizi Izlazak u petnaestom poglavlju u dvadesetãestom stihu. Kljuåne reåi: Stari zavet. Bolesni ljudi su morali da se pokaju i da mole Boga za oproãtenje da bi ozdravili.204 Teoloãki åasopis. jer sam ja Gospod. reãenje i uteha u pogledu ljudskih bolesti kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. Saznavãi za Saru. N° 9 uåenika prema bolestima. 1. Pokajanje je bilo put ka ozdravljenju. demoni. Postanak 20 . i uåiniã ãto je pravo u oåima njegovijem. Da bismo imali ãto jasniju sliku o bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja potrebno je analizirati nekoliko starozavetnih tekstova koji govore o takvim dogaœajima. Avram je govorio za svoju æenu Saru da mu je sestra. Bog je dao åoveku jedan uslov koji ñe mu sigurno obezbediti zdravlje. U Starom zavetu.su bili isceljeni. Avimelek je poslao svoje sluge . Neki od njih. Isus Hristos. nakon ãto su se pokajali. i ako prigneã uho k zapovijestima njegovijem i uãåuvaã sve uredbe njegove. zato ãto je On moj Spasitelj. Pronaãao sam åetiri teksta koja ñu koristiti za ovu analizu. apostoli. ponovo zdravi.

bila je bela kao sneg. koji. ko bude posluãan biñe blagosloven. a zatim je Mariji i Aronu rekao da su uåinili greh gunœajuñi protiv Mojsija kao njegovog proroka sa kojim on razgovara lice u lice. a zatim da se za njega pomoli Boæiji åovek ili prorok. Avram se pomolio da Bog isceli Avimeleka i ceo njegov dom. ako izvrãi moæe da ozdravi i ostane æiv. Aron se pokajao i zamolio Mojsija da moli Boga za Marijino isceljenje. zato mu je Bog dao uslov. Inaåe. bolest je i u ovom sluåaju bila kazna za greh. Marija i Aron su gunœali protiv Mojsija jer im se nije svidelo ãto je uzeo æenu Madijanku. Dakle. u starozavetno doba. Zbog Avramovog kukaviåluka. prvo trebao da se pokaje za uåinjeni greh/grehe. Stari zavet nije baã poznat po milosti.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 205 da mu je dovedu za æenu. i to se i dogodilo. i da ñe zbog toga Avimelek poginuti. Gospod je pozvao Mariju. Meœutim. Bog je.govori o Boæijoj kazni za Mariju koja je gunœala protiv Mojsija kao Boæijeg proroka. Kada je Bog otiãao iz ãatora od sastanka. u ovom primeru Bog se smilovao na Avimeleka i dao mu uslov od åijeg je ispunjenja zavisio njegov. Bog je rekao Avimeleku u snu da je uåinio zlo jer je uzeo æenu koja ima muæa. vratio je Saru Avramu i joã mu je dao mnoge darove. Trebao je da vrati Saru Avramu i da se Avram pomoli za njega jer je Avram prorok. Brojevi 12 . pomolio se za Marijino isceljenje i Bog mu je rekao da ñe ona biti za sedam dana zdrava i da se onda moæe vratiti nazad u narod. kao kaznu za greh davao bolest koja je vodila u smrt. Meœutim. neposluãnost. Boæiji åovek. Oni su smatrali da Gospod ne govori samo preko Mojsija. 2. Videvãi Mariju. U Starom zavetu je vaæilo pravilo: ko zgreãi biñe kaænjen. Avimelek je to uåinio iz neznanja. videlo se da se njegov gnev spustio na Mariju jer je ona bila gubava. Gospoda Boga je ovo gunœanje naljutilo. i æivot njegove porodice. Boæiji åovek. da bi åovek ozdravio. Dakle iz ovog primera moæemo videti da je u starozavetno doba. Avimelek je ispunio Boæiji uslov. Ono ãto je bilo potrebno da bi Marija bila isceljena je . Mojsije. Arona i Mojsija da doœu u ãator od sastanka.

3. bez milosti su umirali. Kada se Jezekija smrtno razboleo doãao mu je prorok Isaija i preneo mu poruku od Gospoda da ñe umreti. bio je Bogu veran i celim srcem je åinio ono ãto je bilo Bogu ugodno. Gospod je to åuo pa je spustio svoj gnev na one koji su gunœali tako da je veliki broj ljudi pomreo od ujeda zmija. U protivnom. Jezekija je to posluãao i ozdravio je. Isaija 38:1-5. a zatim da to kaæu Boæijem proroku. Mojsije je napravio zmiju onakvu kakvu mu je Gospod zapovedio da napravi. pokajali su se ãto su gunœali i doãli su kod Mojsija moleñi ga da moli Gospoda da ukloni zmije od naroda. Narod Izraelski se spasao pogledom vere u zmiju koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao. Jezekija je bio veoma poboæan.206 Teoloãki åasopis. i preko proroka Isaije mu poruåio da ñe poæiveti joã petnaest godina. a nisu se pokajali i prihvatili Boæije reãenje za ozdravljenje. u ovom sluåaju za Mariju. i zato ãto im se hleb ogadio. Inaåe. Isus je govorio da ñe i on biti podignut kao i ova zmija i da ñe svako ko poveruje u Njega biti spaãen (Jovan 3:14). N° 9 pokajanje i molitva proroka. bilo je bitno da se oni pokaju za svoj greh.govori o tome kako se Bog smilovao na ljude koji su gunœali protiv njega i dao Mojsiju reãenje od bolesti. da bi se on pomolio za njih i njihovo ozdravljenje. smilovao se Jezekiji. Meœutim. za bolesnu osobu. Boæijeg åoveka. . Gospod je åuo tu molitvu. i svako ko je verom pogledao u tu zmiju. Kada su ostali videli ãta se deãava. Zato je Jezekija u suzama molio Gospoda da mu se smiluje i da mu da da poæivi joã nekoliko godina. 21 . Mojsije se molio za to i Bog je sklonio zmije i rekao mu naåin na koji ñe ozdraviti oni koje su zmije ujele. bio je ozdravljen.govori o Jezekijinoj smrtnoj bolesti i isceljenju te bolesti jer je Bog odluåio da Jezekija poæivi joã petnaest godina. Znaåi. Brojevi 21:5-9 . Isus je sebe uporedio sa ovom zmijom koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao da bi je svi videli. Isaija je rekao Jezekiji da uzme grudu suvih smokava i da stavi na mesto na kom je otok i da ñe tako ozdraviti. 4. svi oni koje su ujedale zmije. Izraelci su se bunili protiv Boga i Mojsija zbog toga ãto su ih izveli iz Misira.

Moguñe je da je i u ovom sluåaju greh bio uzrok bolesti. kako je koristio svoj autoritet i svoju moñ kada je isceljivao bolesne. Uglavnom je bolest bila kazna za greh. 53:4). znaåajno je videti kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima. Smatram da ñemo tada imati jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja. Dakle. Iako nije jasno reåeno koji je bio uzrok Jezekijine bolesti. drugim reåima. Sveto pismo nam indirektno govori da je najznaåajnije videti kako se Isus postavljao prema bolestima. On je doãao da oslobodi suænje. ta je sila izlazila iz Njega (Lk. Isusova sluæba je bila puna takvih dogaœaja. bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja nam daju joã jasniju i bogatiju sliku o uzrocima i razlozima bolesti i naåinima isceljenja bolesnih od strane Isusa Hrista i njegovih uåenika. Meœutim. ukoliko su se bolesni pokajali i ukoliko se Boæiji åovek molio za njih. Mislim da smo analizirajuñi ova åetiri primera dobili jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja. Isus i bolesti u evanœelju po Luki Za Isusa Hrista je najavljeno da ñe isceliti mnoge kada bude doãao na ovu zemlju (Is. Ali. videti kako su koristili Isusov autoritet i njegovu moñ da bi iscelili bolesne. U Luki 5:17 je zapisano da je Isus leåio silom Gospodnjom. da bolesti naãe nosi i nemoñi naãe uzme (Is. Kada je isceljivao. 8:46). Bog je i u Starom zavetu imao milosti prema greãnima pa je. bili ozdravljani. 4:36). posledica greha. Bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja Novi zavet na mnogo mesta govori o bolestima i njihovim isceljenjima. On je posedovao tu silu i nije imao potrebu da se poziva na neki autoritet. On je imao veliku moñ i ljudi su se zaprepaãñivali jer je åinio pred njima åuda isceljenja i izgonio demone (Lk. ãta je radio. 53). .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 207 Ovaj dogaœaj je Jezekija zapisao u svojoj knjizi (38:9-20). Isus je imao taj autoritet i narod je to primeñivao. kako je isceljivao bolesne tj. ipak bismo mogli pretpostaviti da su u pitanju bili gresi koje je ranije poåinio jer u sedamnaestom stihu Jezekija kaæe da je Gospod “bacio za leœa svoja sve grijehe moje”. Nadalje. To je i radio.

Moris: 1983: str.208 Teoloãki åasopis. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. 24. 4:38. odnosno da su svi bolesni kaænjeni jer su poåili mnogo greha.1 Reåi nisu bile izgovorene ali je sam åin bio nema molba. Isus je rekao: åoveåe. Poãto je bila velika guæva. Isus je rekao ono ãto je moralo da se uradi. Isusa je zadivila vera njegovih prijatelja. Isus se nagnuo nad njom i zapretio groznici. trebalo je prvo oprostiti grehe. Autoritativno se izraæavajuñi. Isus se nije osvrtao na njih iako je znao da su oni tu da bi ga uhvatili u pogreãci. Isus je video njihovu veru i ozdravio åoveka. veñ je to uradio da bi paralisani åovek mogao da bude isceljen. On to nije namerno uradio da bi se prepirao sa farisejima. jer je to bilo reãenje. a tri ñu detaljnije analizirati. 25 – isceljenje uzetoga. 23. Kod ovog bolesnika uzrok bolesti je na prvom mestu bio greh.2 Iako su tu bili prisutni fariseji. Manson smatra da “ono ãto je taj dogaœaj u prvom redu trebao istaknuti jeste upravo åinjenica da Isusov autoritet u podruåju vere poåinje opraãtanjem greha”. N° 9 U nastavku ñu navesti trinaest neposrednih Isusovih izleåenja bolesnih. 39 – isceljenje Petrove taãte. 5:18-20. 1. sve ñu ih ukratko prokomentarisati. . Petrova taãta je ustala zdrava i posluæivala ih je.3 Moæda neki smatraju da 1 2 3 Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. ali to ne implicira da je greh uzrok svaåije bolesti. Isus je doãao u Petrovu kuñu. Petrova taãta je bila bolesna. U ovoj situaciji su mu naroåito trebali ljudi koji bi ga odneli do Isusa. 115. imala je groznicu. Ovom bolesniku su bili potrebni ljudi koji bi ga nosili ako bi trebao negde da ode. 989. Isusove prve reåi u ovom dogaœaju govore o grehu. opraãtaju ti se gresi. njegovi prijatelji su trebali imati veliku veru u Isusa da bi raskopali krov od kuñe i spustili bolesnika pred Isusa. 2. a ne o bolesti.

pozvao Isusa da to uåini. 8:43-48 nam govori o isceljenju krvotoåive æene. 6:6-10 – isceljenje åoveka sa suvom rukom. 8:43-48 – isceljenje krvotoåive æene. ali mu je. Tako je i bilo. 7:1-10 – isceljenje kapetanovog sluge. na koje nije bilo odgovora. Isus je reåju iscelio suvu ruku tom åoveku rekavãi: “pruæi svoju ruku”. 13:1-5). 160. 15:25). Nakon jednog Isusovog pitanja. Dok je Isus jedne subote uåio u sinagogi zapazio je åoveka sa suvom desnom rukom. Ovo ne znaåi da ljudi ne trebaju iñi kod lekara. Meœu njima su bile Marija Magdalena. Odeljak Lk. Jovana.4 Luka se usredsreœuje na samo isceljenje. da se ona mnogo namuåila dok se leåila kod lekara jer je to za Luku koji je i sam bio lekar bilo sasvim normalno da je ta æena tako prolazila. 6. Nekada bolesnici idu kod lekara i potroãe svoje imanje da bi bili izleåeni ali ne vredi. 8:2-3 – Isus je isceljivao i nespomenute u Evanœeljima. 5. Ova æena je iãla kod 4 Vidi: Moris: 1983: str. Zbog toga ãto je znao misli fariseja i knjiæevnika. verujuñi da Isus moæe isceliti njegovog slugu. Mislim da je to moguñe ali to ne mora da bude pravilo (Vidi Lk. 3. Susana i mnoge druge koje ne spominju Evanœelja. Ljudima ne preostaje niãta drugo nego da pogledom vere gledaju na Onog koji je Lekar nad lekarima. Isus je bio zadivljen kapetanovom verom. . Ona je doæivljavala mnoge neugodnosti jer su je smatrali neåistom zbog krvarenja (Lev. Ovaj tekst govori o Isusovim sledbenicama koje je Isus izleåio od zlih duhova i bolesti. ujedno. pozvao je åoveka sa bolesnom rukom da stane na sredinu sinagoge. Luka nam ovde ne kaæe.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 209 greh obavezno donosi neku bolest. Kapetan rimske vojske je. kao ãto to evanœelista Marko kaæe. 4. Kapetan je poruåio da je dovoljna samo jedn Isusova reå i njegov ñe sluga biti zdrav. poruåio da on nije dostojan da Isus uœe u njegovu kuñu niti da on sam doœe pred njega. na Isusa.

a bavljenje takvim poslom na ãabat je bilo zabranjeno. Ova æena koja nije mogla. vera tvoja spasla te je. 13:10-13 – isceljena æena koja je 18 godina pogrbljena je moj treñi detaljniji primer koji koristim u ovoj analizi. isti sluåaj moæe biti sa nekima od nas. Ovaj dogaœaj je narod zadivio a zavidne posmatraåe odveo u drugi ekstrem. 995. zbog zakona (Lev. priñi Isusu otvoreno. Sotona ju 5 6 7 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. idi s mirom”. Isus je isterao neåistog duha i na taj naåin izleåio deåaka. 35. N° 9 lekara ali nije vredelo. Religiozne voœe su smatrale da je isceljenje lekarski posao. 11:14 – izgoni demona i nemi progovara. “kñeri.5 Naravno. Isus je isterao demona iz nemog åoveka i åovek je progovorio.6 7. Ona je bila Avramova kñer ali je njena bolest bila zla. priãla mu je u veri æeleñi tajno da se dotakne Njega i bude isceljena. 15:27). Isus je silazio sa gore preobraæenja i naiãao na åoveka koji ga je zamolio da mu isceli sina. 9:38-42 – isceljenje mladiña koji ima padavicu. veñ da je njena vera u Njega ta koja ju je iscelila.7 Niãta ne upuñuje na pretpostavku da je ta æena verovala u Isusa. Zato. . 8. Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str.210 Teoloãki åasopis. stareãina sinagoge nije mogao da vidi dalje od propisane norme i da u ozdravljenju zgråene æene ugleda Isusovu samilost. Nije hteo da to ostane samo izmeœu njih. Dakle. Isus je æeleo da ta æena da svedoåanstvo pred svima. Dok su deåaka dovodili Isusu demon je bacio deåaka na zemlju i poåeo da ga trza. Æeleo je da se ova æena predstavi i da joj da na znanje da njegova odeña nema nikakvo magiåno dejstvo. U ovom stihu se govori o joã jednom primeru Isusove sile i autoriteta. posle svih neuspeha ona je doãla do Isusa. 52. Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. 9. Deåak je imao padavicu jer ga je neåisti duh bacao na zemlju. vera joj je pomogla i bila je isceljena.

åuvãi da Isus prolazi. i dotaknuo njegovo uvo. Isusa je srelo deset gubavaca koji su izdaleka podigli glas molbe da se on smiluje na njih. .8 Isus je æenu proglasio isceljenom. U toj kuñi je bio åovek koji je patio od vodene bolesti. 22:50. Slepac je. slavio je Boga i vratio se da zahvali Isusu. Isus im je dao reå da ñe biti oåiãñeni na putu do sveãtenika kojima su trebali da se pokaæu. Petar je napao prvosveãtenikovog slugu i odsekao mu je desno uvo. 17:12-14 – isceljenje deset gubavaca. Kada su prvosveãtenikove sluge doãle po Isusa da bi ga priveli. Isus se smilovao nad njim i reåju ga izleåio. te da je Isus samo dovrãio isceljenje”. 1003. Na putu za Jerihon Isus je prolazio pored jednog slepca. priãao mu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 211 je svezao. Na putu izmeœu Samarije i Galileje. Kada su ga doveli do Isusa. 229. 14:1-4 – isceljenje åoveka koji ima vodenu bolest. Isus se smilovao na slugu. uzroånika bolesti. povikao iz sveg glasa da se Isus smiluje nad njim. Iscelio je slugino uvo bez da ga je sluga to zamolilo. Jedan od njih je video da je izleåen. Isus uglavnom nije polagao ruke na bolesnike. “Moæda Luka æeli reñi da je u tom trenutku ona veñ od tog duha (11) bila osloboœena (12). slepac je zatraæio da Isus uåini da on progleda. 13. komentariãuñi da ga je spasla njegova vera. U ovih trinaest primera mogli smo videti Isusa i Njegovu postavku prema duhovnim aspektima bolesti. 51 – isceljenje uva prvosveãtenikovog sluge. Isus ga je izleåio dohvatom nakon neodgovorenog pitanja: “da li se sme subotom leåiti?” 11. Mislim da su ovi primeri dovoljno pouåni da bismo ovo shvatili: Isus je Lekar nad 8 9 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Isus je jedne subote bio gost u kuñi farisejskog stareãine. Moris: 1983: str.9 10. Ova bolest je bila prouzrokovana demonom koji ju je dræao zgråenom. Prilikom isterivanja demona. 12. 18:35-43 – isceljenje jerihonskog slepca. videvãi ãta se deãava. poloæio je svoje ruke na nju i ona se odmah ispravila.

N° 9 lekarima. naglasak je moj). verovati u Njegovu moñ isceljivanja. Kada je prizvano Isusovo ime da isceli bolest. Zato. zaista.212 Teoloãki åasopis. a Luka tako uokviravajuñi ozdravljenje uspeva izazvati najsnaæniji utisak kod åitatelja. ja ñu uåiniti” (Jovan 14:12-14. 3:1-16 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja. i veña od ovih. da se proslavi Otac u Sinu. Takoœe. mogu zatraæiti od Oca. Stoga. da se dogode i åuda. Ako me ãto zamolite u moje ime. i ãto god zaiãtete u moje ime. Petrovo “pogledaj u nas” pojaåava napetost. u svim ovim primerima vidimo da je potrebna vera u Isusa Hrista. 14:12-14). treba da verujemo da Isus oåekuje da mi idemo kod lekara koji ñe nas izleåiti od bolesti koje nisu izazvane od strane neåistih sila veñ zbog naãe nemarnosti oko oåuvanja zdravlja. . nekada opraãta grehe pa isceljuje. verujuñi u Njegovo ime. kada govorimo o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja ne smemo izostaviti apostole (uåenike Hristove) i njihove postavke prema bolestima. Apostoli i bolesti U ovom delu rada bih hteo da kaæem neãto o tome kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima i ãta su åinili po pitanju toga jer Isus je rekao uåenicima: “Zaista. ovde se æelim osvrnuti na ãest dogaœaja apostolskih izleåenja bolesnih opisanih u ovoj knjizi. ko veruje u mene åiniñe dela koja ja åinim. iako je u njemu Isus Nazareñanin ipak najvaæniji uåesnik. Meœutim. nekada izgoni demone i isceljuje. Isus je dao autoritet svojim uåenicima da u Njegovo ime åine joã veña åuda od onih koja je i On sam åinio dok je æiveo na zemlji (Lk. Nekada samo isceljuje. Jvn. Najverodostojnije i najjaåe dokaze o ovoj Isusovoj izjavi moæemo nañi u knjizi Dela apostolskih. Ovo je velika istina. Apostol Petar i Jovan glavne su liånosti ovog dogaœaja. 10:17-19. kaæem vam. starosti ili nemoñi tela. jer ja idem k Ocu. åetiri ñu analizirati a dva ñu samo prokomentarisati: 1. Isus je otiãao Ocu i od onda pa do danas Hristovi sledbenici. to ñu uåiniti. u Isusovo ime.

Apostoli nisu isceljivali svojom sopstvenom silom. i to ne Petrovom senkom. 1075.11 “Hriãñani imaju neãto mnogo bolje ãto mogu da podele. To je upravo ono ãto je Petar imao ( i dao) . Isusa Hrista”12 Odgovor koji je dao apostol Petar u Delima 4:8-10 je jednak odgovoru koji je dao u Delima 4:16.14 Zapravo. Njegovo ime koje ne samo ãto opraãta (Dela 2:38). sila Boæija se kroz njih pokazivala u mnogim znacima i åudima.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 213 onda je moñno Isusovo ime poåelo delovati. Petar je dao do znanja. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. ko mu je dao autoritet i moñ da isceljuje. Ovde se priseñamo masovnih ozdravljenja koja je Isus pre åinio. 2. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. 1073. ili autoritet. ovde vidimo da se ispunila molitva apostola iz Dela 4:29-30.posveñenje koje dolazi kroz veru u ime. Koristeñi Isusovo ime. Åuda ãto su ovde navedena nadilaze ona kojima su nas do sad obavestila Dela apostolska. Ova åuda su oåitovala silu Mesije koji je bio razapet i vaskrsnut iz mrtvih i koji je i u ovakvim trenucima bio sa uåenicima. 5:12-16 – Isus je kroz apostole leåio bolesnike. 15. i reåima i delom. 11. Dogaœala su se åuda. …”i vera – do koje dolazimo njegovim posredstvom – dala mu je potpuno zdravlje pred svima vama”. propovedala reå. 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 . 75. nego i ozdravlja. 54. bili su isceljeni.15 10 10 11 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str.10 “U ime Isusa iz Nazareta” znaåi “autoritetom Isusa Hrista”. veñ silom Duha Svetog. U ovom odeljku se govori o mnogim åudima koja su se zbivala preko apostolskih ruku.13 Ljudi koji bi proãli pored Petrove senke ili ako je ona padala na bolesnike. Carson: 1994: str. veñ Boæijom silom koja je delovala kroz Petra. stekli su poãtovanje. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str.

16 16 17 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str.. N° 9 3. Kada se apostol Pavle prvi put sreo sa vaskrslim Hristom na putu za Damask privremeno je ostao slep. veñ nas u ovom sluåaju pomalo iznenaœuje Lukin izveãtaj o naåinu isceljenja koji ne nalazimo ni u evanœeljima. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Brojna åuda u Novom zavetu su zavisila. samo je Bog sada åinio åuda kroz Pavla.214 Teoloãki åasopis. dolazi do Pavla nakon nekoliko dana i polaæe ruke na njega da u ime Isusa progleda i ispuni se Duhom. bilo je logiåno da ta odeña nema snagu dok ne dotakne apostolovo telo. U takvom mestu je Bog pokazao svoju silu kroz Pavla åinivãi neobiåna åuda. Dl. i veña od ovih…”). Åuda su imala znaåajnu ulogu u Isusovom delovanju (Dl. baã kao i ovde. Jedan uåenik po imenu Ananija. Pavle je zapazio hromog åoveka kako pomno prati njegov govor i kako ima veru u spasenje.dela koja ja åinim. 221. 15. 19:11. Meœutim. 9:6. nas ne treba da iznenadi to da Bog moæe da isceljuje. 1096. Verovatno je Pavle to uåinio u Isusovo ime da hromi prohoda iako to u tekstu nije jasno spomenuto. Luka je ovo zapisao namerno jer je smatrao da ova åuda nisu “obiåna”. 6:19. Ove reåi sadræe opis nesvakidaãnjih hriãñanskih åudesa. 5. 5:12. 13:13. Sa nekog rastojanja mu je snaænim glasom rekao da ustane.16 Drugo. 8:54. 17 .7. kod åuda koja je Isus åinio17 (“. Buduñi da je Pavle bio posrednik u izvrãenju Boæijih åuda. 5:13. 4:40. 9:8-18 – Pavle je progledao nakon nekog vremena. 14:3). Ovaj odeljak nam govori o istom sluåaju kao i sa Petrom u 5:12-16. 22:51. ova åuda su se odigrala u mestu u kojem je bilo mnogo crne magije i okultizma. 14:8-10 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja kroz Pavla. 4. Jvn. 2:22 i 10:38). 12 – Bog åini velika isceljenja i åuda kroz Pavla. o upotrebi nekog predmeta i dodira (Lk. Ljudi su pokuãavali uz pomoñ nekih magijskih formula da pokuãaju da åine åuda. 9:12.

1199 Meœutim. ozdravljenje je doãlo kroz molitvu i polaganje Pavlovih ruku na bolesnika. ako posmatramo kompletno ljudsko biñe. bolest bude tretirana na duhovni naåin. åak i u poloæaju brodolomnika u okovima. za koje åak smatram da su prioritetniji. Samo na ovom putovanju. iako tekst ne govori o tome. dijagnoze i terapije. govori se samo da su bili poåaãñeni na mnoge naåine. treba se moliti za isceljenje da Bog ozdravi tu osobu. 1106. Ovo ozdravljenje je privuklo mnoge da doœu kod Pavla iz istog razloga. Zbog toga. Neki pisci komentrara misle da ih je izleåio lekar Luka koji je bio sa Pavlom. Moæemo pretpostaviti da su Pavle i drugi hriãñani propovedali dobru vest i imali nekoliko uspeha. imao je groznicu i srdobolju. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Svrhu bolesti nalazim u duhovnoj oblasti i zato smatram da nije dovoljno samo se fokusirati i leåiti fiziåke aspekte bolesti. Ne znamo jer se ne spominju zli duhovi kod sluåaja ove bolesti. postoje i duhovni aspetki bolesti. Ovim istraæivanjem æelim da ukaæem da. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. sem fiziåkih. 81. snaæno je uzdrmao æivote kapetana. ukoliko vidimo jasan duhovni uzrok bolesti. 18 Otac ovog malteãkog vladara je bio bolestan. Pavlova molitva i polaganje ruku izleåili su ga. 293. Pavle je nastavio da sluæi drugima. vaæno mi je da napomenem da. danas ñemo prvenstveno pomisliti na lekare i traæiñemo njihovo miãljenje.20 Implikacije Kada su bolesti u pitanju. 19 20 20 . onda treba da. 28:7-9 – Pavle se moli za Pubijevog oca i on biva isceljen kao i mnogi drugi bolesnici na Malti. Bog je sve ovo vodio i uåinio da Pavle i ostali sa broda budu dobro snabdeveni za put do Rima.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 215 6. Ne znamo da li Luka ovde implicira egzorcizam. 18 18 19 Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. kao i mnoge druge. i oni su ozdravljali. glavnog zvaniånika Malte. samo ili prvenstveno.

8:7). padavice ili drugih bolesti uzrok delovanje demona. 5:1-20. Isus je iz deåaka isterao demona padavice (Mt. 8:26-39). Demoni mogu biti uzrok bolesti.23 Pogreãna dijagnoza opsednutosti demonima moæe imati katastrofalne posledice na nekoga ko je duãevno ili emocionalno bolestan pa to moæe uzrokovati snaæan oseñaj krivice i oseñaj da ih je Bog odbacio. ovde su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. 7:21. U I Kor.13. 12:22. on ustanovljava tri uzroka bolesti: greh. 8:28-34. Bog i demonske sile. Pavle objaãnjava da neki u Korintu su slabi i bolesni zato ãto je njihov greh bio to ãto nisu 21 21 22 Vidi: Oropeza: 2001: str. 11:14-15) i iz onih poremeñena uma (Mt.22 Kada su u pitanju duãevne bolesti. Davids govori u knjizi “Wrestiling with dark angels”o bolestima s duhovnih aspekata. Isceljivanje bolesti i izgon demona nije uvek jedno te isto (Mk. 69. Mk. Ali moæeã biti u ropstvu jer si previdio ili zanijekao realnost demonskih sila koje su na djelu u danaãnjem svijetu”. 22 23 23 . Lk. Ovo se moæe izbeñi ako se osoba uputi na odgovarajuñe psihijatrijsko leåenje.216 Teoloãki åasopis. 1:34. Greh je uzrok bolesti. “ne tvrdim da je svaki duhovni problem rezultat direktne demonske aktivnosti.21 Slaæem se sa Andersonom. Oropeza citira Basil Jackson: Oropeza: 2001: str. 11:30. neizobraæenih ljudi napravilo je viãe ãtete nego dobra prepoznavajuñi demone ondje gdje ih nije bilo”. Mk. 68. Zaista trebam odgovore na ovakva pitanja i verujem da se odgovor razlikuje od sluåaja do sluåaja. 5:16. moæemo se zapitati sledeñe: da li su demoni uzrok bolesti? Novi zavet navodi mnoge primere gde su demoni uzroånici bolesti. Anderson:2002: str. Mt. Lk. 9:32-34. Previãe revnih. Kada dr Peter H. 9:14-29. ali ne smemo misliti da je u svakom sluåaju slepoñe. Dl. pa åak i duhovnog fanatizma. 17:14-21. Kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. Lk. Zato. Lk. N° 9 Dakle. 33. “nemojte pobrkati duãevni poremeñaj s demonom. 115. 8:16. izbegavam ovde da generalizujem ili da iznosim neke zakljuåke koji bi u ovoj oblasti doveli do neke vrste iskljuåivosti. 9:37-43). Isterivao je demone iz slepih i nemih (Mt.

uzeo bih to kao izuzetke ali ne i kao pravilo. ne bih se sasvim sloæio sa dr Davidson u vezi toga da je Bog uzrok bolesti. Demonske sile su uzrok bolesti.24 Dimitrije Kaleziñ smatra da je ljudsko biñe inficirano grehom i da je greh najåeãñi uzrok bolesti (neåiste sile ni ne spominje). On smatra da do isceljenja od takve bolesti se dolazi ako je åovekova liånost okrenuta “Bogu radi unutraãnje ili mistiåne saradnje – to je uslov za zdravlje. Zato nam je od velike pomoñi klasiåna medicina koja u danaãnje vreme åini skoro åuda. i joã neki mogu se direktno putem Duha Svetoga dovesti u vezu kod nekih osoba koje su zgreãile i obolele. Zato smatram da je potrebno otiñi kod lekara i posavetovati se sa 24 24 25 Vidi: Wagner: 1990: str. 5:5.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 217 uvaæavali jedinstvo u Telu kao Gospodnju veåeru. Luka 13:10-17 govori o æeni koja je zgråena oko 18 godina od “duha bolesti”. Meœutim. Bog je uzrok bolesti. Meœutim. Ljudska istraæivanja o raznim bolestima i o njihovom leåenju su dostigla visok nivo. 12:20-23). Ljudsko telo koje je Bog savrãeno stvorio nakon pada u greh ne funkcioniãe onako kako ga je Bog naåinio da funkcioniãe. kao ãto je i dr Davidson naveo neke svetopisamske primere. Pavle zapoveda crkvama da odbace sramne greãnike koje ñe Satana uzeti za “propast tela”. Smatram da Bog dozvoljava bolest zbog odreœenog cilja. kao u sluåaju Jova da je Bog dozvolio Satani da iskuãa Jova i na taj naåin. U I Kor. 11). lakomstva. U Novom zavetu su demoske sile viãe u vezi sa bolestima nego ãto je Bog. Gresi neopraãtanja i nepomirenja. Varisus (Dl. vraåarstva i idolopoklonstva. 218-221. 15:5) a i u Novom zavetu: Irod Agripa (Dl. Verujem. da li je Bog ikada uzrok bolesti? U Starom zavetu jeste (II Kr. smatram da Bog ponekad interveniãe i na taj naåin. 121-124. Ako je greh uzrok bolesti. 13:6-12). i samo zdravlje”. Mada. i to je Boæiji dar. Milaãinoviñ: 1995: str. gresi neverja poput odbacivanja milostivoga Boga ili ravnoduãnosti.25 Istina je da je ljusko biñe zbog pada u greh postalo podloæno mnogim vrstama bolesti. 25 . Korinñani (I Kor.

Ukoliko Bog i klasiåna medicina. smatram da tu nema nikakve druge ãanse da se åovek izleåi na ispravan naåin. Kada razmiãljam o duhovnim aspektima bolesti mislim samo na jedno reãenje: vera u Isusa Hrista. Inaåe. kao Boæiji dar. koje u svojoj alebiciji hoñe da nas usreñe. I molitva vere spaãñe bolesnika. S druge strane. Ãto se tiåe bele magije. Trebamo molitvom priñi Bogu i traæiti vodstvo Svetoga Duha da nam razjasni i da silu da reãimo odreœenu situaciju kada je bolest u pitanju. trebamo koristititi i taj Boæiji dar. smatram da je ona od œavola iako se pokazuje kao pozitivna. da pravimo neki univerzalni duhovni recept. Zakljuåio bih da ne bi bilo mudro da pokuãamo da gradimo bilo kakvu generalizaciju o bolestima na osnovu izabranih svetopisamskih odlomaka. i Gospod ñe ga podiñi. Drugim reåima. Slaæem se sa dr Jovanom N. Religiozna oseñanja. sile i one druge. ne izleåe åoveka. kao moñnog Isceljitelja. N° 9 njima kada smo bolesni. kroz krizu verovanja. kao imanentna potreba i spiritus movens naãe egzistencije jesu tvrœava na koje su kidisale sile neåastive. Izmeœu ostalog. ako je i uåinio grehe.218 Teoloãki åasopis. “dobronamerna”. Bela magija pokuãava da otkloni bolest jer ne moæe da izleåi åoveka. Strikoviñem. ako je neko bolestan i ne moæe da ozdravi treba da zna da je duãa vaænija od tela i da treba da se mnogo viãe fokusira na spasenje svoje duãe kroz veru u Isusa Hrista. biñe mu oproãteno. pre svega. 26 Sveto pismo nam kaæe ãta da åinimo kada su u pitanju bolesti: “Boluje li ko meœu vama? Neka dozove crkvene stareãine. 26 . dakle. nemojmo uvek smatrati da je u pitanju neki demon jer je vrlo lako moguñe da je u pitanju samo neka telesna bolest koju ñe lekari reãiti bez ikakve muke. jedan drugome grehe i molite se Bogu 26 Milaãinoviñ: 1995: Unutraãnja stranica na poleœinskoj korici knjige. odnosno unesreñe”. “kriza savremene civilizacije prepoznaje se. Ispovedajte. pa neka se pomole nad njim i pomaæu ga uljem u ime Gospodnje. bolest moæe biti samo prosto oboljenje neåega.

kojom se oznaåava vrhunska strast kao vera. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST. .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 219 jedan za drugoga. Molitva vere. 27 27 Isto. usvojiti bez prisustva vere. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije. A. Neil 2002 On lomi okove. Downers Grove. niãta se ne moæe razumeti. Zato trebamo znati da “smisao naãeg æivota i æivljenja nije u onom smislu koji ñe odrediti neko drugi veñ u egzistenciji vere. Illinois: IVP. ur. su za mene prvi i kljuåni postupci pri ozdravljenju ili isceljenju bolesnika. voleti. Dæejms 1999 Luka: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje. Ovi stihovi nam govore kako da najpravilnije postupimo da ne bismo napravili katastrofalne greãke. posredniåka delotvorna molitva pravednika i isceljivanje u ime Gospodnje (u ime Isusa Hrista). Hrvatska: Logos Daruvar. Daruvar. Ne moæe se ni opstati ni ostati bez njenog udela!”27 Vera je kljuå. 1994 New bible commentary. CITIRANA DELA Anderson T. Zaista.” (Jak. Ovo je po mom miãljenju prvi korak kada su u pitanju bolesti. Lee Ash Antony 1986 Djela apostolska: tumaåenje Djela apostolskih. Galvin C. ispovedanje greha. 5:14-16 naglasci su moji!). Mnogo moæe delotvorna molitva pravednika. prihvatiti. Carson D. da budete isceljeni.

U. IZDANJE BIBLIJSKOG DRUÃTVA BEOGRAD. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST.A. N° 9 Milaãinoviñ Jasmina 1995 Religija i duãevni æivot åoveka. Peter 1990 Wrestling with dark angels. Beograd: ZAVOD ZA BOLESTI ZAVISNOSTI I PARTENON M. Wagner C. Moris Leon 1983 Luka: tumaåenje Evanœelja po Luki. Ventura.M. Novi zavet: prevod dr Emilijana M.220 Teoloãki åasopis. 2000 O anœelima. Åarniña. Kalifornija. Verman R. Hrvatska: STEPress.S. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije. Oropeza B. . David 2001 Dela apostolska: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje. Zagreb. Javier.: Regal Books. demonima i duhovnom ratovanju: 99 pitanja i odgovora.A.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful